Encyclopedia of Ethical Failure

Department of Defense Office of General Counsel Standards of Conduct Office Updated July 2013



The Standards of Conduct Office of the Department of Defense General Counsel’s Office has assem led the follo!in" selection of cases of ethical failure for use as a trainin" tool# Our "oal is to pro$ide DoD personnel !ith real e%amples of &ederal employees !ho ha$e intentionally or un!ittin"ly $iolated the standards of conduct# Some cases are humorous' some sad' and all are real# Some !ill an"er you as a &ederal employee and some !ill an"er you as an (merican ta%payer# )lease pay particular attention to the multiple *ail and pro ation sentences' fines' employment terminations and other sanctions that !ere ta+en as a result of these ethical failures# ,iolations of many ethical standards in$ol$e criminal statutes# )rotect yourself and your employees y learnin" !hat you need to +no! and accessin" your ("ency ethics counselor if you ecome unsure of the proper course of conduct# -e sure to access them before you ta+e action re"ardin" the issue in .uestion# /any of the cases displayed in this collection could ha$e een a$oided completely if the offender had ta+en this simple precaution# The cases ha$e een arran"ed accordin" to offense for ease of access# &eel free to reproduce and use them as you li+e in your ethics trainin" pro"ram# &or e%ample 0 you may e conductin" a trainin" session re"ardin" political acti$ities# &eel free to copy and paste a case or t!o into your slidesho! or handout 1 or use them as e%amples or discussion pro lems# 2f you ha$e a case you !ould li+e to ma+e a$aila le for inclusion in a future update of this collection' please email it to soco3osd#mil or you may fa% it to 45036 7890:850#

This Encyclopedia of Ethical Failure is intended to sensiti;e &ederal employees to the reach and impact of &ederal ethics statutes and re"ulations# 2t is est used to supplement personal $erification of those statutes and re"ulations# 2t should not e interpreted as a indin" or authoritati$e presentation of the la!#

Note of Special Thanks
<e than+ the DoD O2G for their case contri utions to the =ncyclopedia#


Abuse of Position
Chief Authority
( military ser$ice Chief /aster Ser"eant a used her authority and improperly used a "o$ernment $ehicle !hen she employed a "o$ernment $ehicle and three non0 commissioned officers under her super$ision to mo$e personal property in a "o$ernment rental $ehicle# The soldiers helped her for 3 hours# The Chief /aster Ser"eant !as "i$en a $er al !arnin" and ad$ised of the improper use of "o$ernment $ehicles and the a use of authority#

Abuse of Position and Bribery
( military ser$ice Captain used his official position as a reser$ist to o tain contracts for pri$ate sector companies !ith !hich he had an affiliation# 2n addition' the Captain accepted a >finder’s fee? 4i#e#' +ic+ ac+s6 from one company for his efforts in helpin" the company o tain "o$ernment contract !or+# &or his si"nificant ethical failure' the Captain !as >allo!ed? to retire at the "rade of Commander' thou"h he had een selected to e an (dmiral# 2n addition' the Captain !as de arred for one year' !hile t!o of the affiliated companies entered into administrati$e a"reements 4for 3 years6 !ith the military ser$ice#

Coercion by Super isor
The director of a na$al health clinic recei$ed a @3'000 loan from a su ordinate after re.uestin" that the su ordinate loan him @7'000# The @3'000 apparently !asn’t enou"h' ho!e$er' and the director later as+ed for @10'000# This time the su ordinate declined# (fter the director only repaid a fraction of the @3'000' the su ordinate approached the chain of command# 2n addition to ein" directed y his commandin" officer to repay the rest of the loan' the director !as pro$ided !ith a !ritten letter of counselin" re"ardin" his unprofessional and unethical conduct#

DoD !S"#$ %emo ed for &isuse of Authority
( GS012 Aecreation )ro"ram /ana"er !ho super$ised appro%imately 59 ci$ilian and military su ordinates !as remo$ed from his position for se$eral ethical $iolations'


includin" the failure to a$oid the appearance of impropriety# The employee mo$ed into $isitors’ .uarters on a military installation !here he stayed for si% months !ithout payin" full price for his room y pressurin" his su ordinate to ac.uiesce to his payment arran"ements# Be also authori;ed an employee to ma+e a @:00 a"ency e%penditure to purchase !or+out clothin" for one /<A fitness instructor# The employee had no reason to elie$e he had the authority to authori;e this e%penditure and should ha$e made in.uiry efore "i$in" authori;ation# The administrati$e la! *ud"e stated that this act >at the $ery least "i$es the appearance of impropriety and should ha$e raised a red fla"#?

Business Costs Employee
( former administrator for the Department of Bealth and Buman Ser$ices too+ se$eral trips on the "o$ernment’s dime that didn’t loo+ "ood# The ad$isor informed the BBS Secretary that he intended to see+ employment in the pri$ate sector# The Secretary as+ed him to stay !ith the Department until Con"ress passed the ne! /edicare prescription dru" enefits plan# The ad$isor a"reed' ut he continued to pursue his *o search !hile ser$in" as a "o$ernment employee# <hile there is nothin" !ron" !ith "o$ernment employees loo+in" for a ne! *o ' the han"0up for this employee came !hen he decided to ta+e se$eral trips ostensi ly related to his !or+ for the BBS# <hile he !as on these trips' he alle"edly conducted >perfunctory meetin"s? for the BBS' and then he !ent off to do !hat he had really come to doCto ha$e inter$ie!s !ith potential employers# Ae"ardless of !hether or not these trips !ere set up for the purpose of conductin" ono fide "o$ernment usiness' the ad$isor’s meetin"s !ith potential employers durin" those trips "a$e the appearance that he !as usin" his position for personal "ain The employee has a"reed to reim urse the "o$ernment’s costs for the trips' !hich totaled appro%imately @10'000 in $alue#

Federal A'ent Demoted for I(D(in' )erself as a Federal A'ent to a Police *fficer
( Super$isory Special ("ent for the Department of the Treasury 4GS01:6 !as a passen"er in a car that !as pulled o$er y a local police officer# <hen the officer approached the $ehicle' the employee presented the officer !ith her credentials identifyin" herself as a &ederal ("ent# The police officer had not as+ed to see the 9

employee’s identification at all# -ecause la! enforcement officials may e tempted to treat other la! enforcement officials more fa$ora ly' the Department determined the employee presented her "o$ernment credentials to the police officer in hopes of recei$in" more fa$ora le treatment# The federal employee did not e%plicitly as+ the police officer for any fa$ors' ut the circumstances led her a"ency to the conclusion that she had attempted to use her official position for personal "ain' !hich is prohi ited y federal ethics rules# (s a result' the employee’s a"ency determined that she !as untrust!orthy as a super$isor and she !as demoted#

Abuse of )is Positions
( former (T& chief' Carl Truscott' !as in$esti"ated y the Department of Treasury 2nspector General and found to ha$e committed numerous ethics $iolations# (mon" them' Truscott !as found to ha$e misused his position and to ha$e !asted "o$ernment resources y "i$in" his nephe! unlimited access to (T& employees and resources for a school pro*ect# The (T&’s Office of )u lic (ffairs staff !as told y Truscott to comply !ith all of his nephe!’s re.uests# The O)( staff ended up >spoon feedin"? Truscott’s nephe!# O)( staff spent numerous hours conductin" research on pu licly a$aila le information' mailin" the nephe! hard copies' pro$idin" the nephe! !ith stoc+ film foota"e' and conductin" tours and inter$ie!s for the nephe!# Truscott also as+ed employees at the )hiladelphia field office to escort his nephe! on tours' and to perform demonstrations of canine dru" detection for him# <hen Truscott’s nephe! re.uested to $isit the (T& head.uarters' Truscott allo!ed him to use (T& e.uipment' includin" the (T&’s film studio' cameras' and teleprompters to film inter$ie!s# (dditionally' Truscott "a$e his nephe! three personal inter$ie!s' includin" once at the construction site of the ne! (T& uildin" !here Truscott' his assistant' and an O)( staff mem er had to tra$el to "i$e the inter$ie!# Truscott also used his speech!riter to draft tal+in" points for him to use in the inter$ie!s# (nd' as if that !ere not enou"h' after the nephe! completed the $ideo and recei$ed an >(? "rade for it' Truscott continued to allo! him to ma+e re.uests to the (T& for su""estions on impro$in" the $ideo# One employee reported spendin" four or fi$e days complyin" !ith the nephe!’s re.uests#


The 2G !as una le to tally the total num er of employees and hours that !ere de$oted to Truscott’s nephe!' ut estimated that at least 20 (T& employees !ere in$ol$ed# The 2G determined that Truscott $iolated "o$ernment re"ulations prohi itin" federal employees from usin" their office for pri$ate "ain' !astin" "o$ernment resources' and influencin" su ordinates to !aste "o$ernment resources# 4Office of the 2nspector General' Aeport of 2n$esti"ation Concernin" (lle"ed /ismana"ement and /isconduct y Carl J# Truscott' &ormer Director of the -ureau of (lcohol' To acco' &irearms and =%plosi$es#

SES *fficial+s In ol ement ,ith Subordinate -eads to %etirement
The 2nspector General found that an S=S official en"a"ed in an intimate relationship !ith a su ordinate' pro$ided her preferential treatment !hen selectin" her for a ne! position' and misused Go$ernment resources and official time# The official retired efore the 2G completed his report# The 2G report indicated that the official’s relationship !ith a su ordinate ad$ersely affected the !or+place' $iolated the re.uirements for mem ers of the Senior =%ecuti$e Ser$ice' and constituted conduct that !as pre*udicial to the Go$ernment# <itnesses noted that the official failed to hold his paramour accounta le for her professional responsi ilities' and !hen confronted y other employees' ecame $er ally a usin"' $en"eful' and an"ry# The official also ser$ed as the selectin" official' !ho selected his su ordinate for promotion' !hile en"a"ed in an intimate relationship !ith her' there y $iolatin" the /erit system principles and en"a"in" in a prohi ited personal practice#

Affair ,ith Assistant -eads to Employee %emo al
( Deputy (ssistant to the Secretary of Defense !as terminated !hen in$esti"ators disco$ered that he had en"a"ed in a romantic relationship !ith a DoD contractor !ho had ser$ed as his e%ecuti$e assistant# The e%ecuti$e assistant claimed that the end of their affair and the official’s su se.uent persistence had led her to lea$e her position# <hen .uestioned y in$esti"ators re"ardin" the affair' the Deputy (ssistant initially lied as to the nature of the relationship# (lthou"h char"es of se%ual harassment could not e su stantiated' the 2nspector General found the Deputy (ssistant’s eha$ior to e incompati le !ith the standards of 5

conduct esta lished for DoD employees and mem ers of the Senior =%ecuti$e Ser$ice# The Office of the Secretary of Defense promptly initiated actions to terminate the Deputy (ssistant#

DEA A'ent " &isuse of Position
( D=( a"ent !hose responsi ilities included fleet mana"ement and authori;ation of repairs of Go$ernment $ehicles had attempted to o tain free repair ser$ices for his personal $ehicles from t!o $endors# The a"ent also insinuated to the $endors that the cost of repairin" his personal $ehicles could e recouped as part of the char"es for repairs to Go$ernment $ehicles# (fter these alle"ations !ere su stantiated' the a"ent !as dismissed from D=(#

Improper .se of Position
The Department of Justice Office of )rofessional Aesponsi ility 4O)A6 in$esti"ated alle"ations that a Department of Justice 4DOJ6 attorney prepared another personDs application for a $isa !ith a co$er memorandum on DOJ stationery# The DOJ attorney also included one of his DOJ usiness cards in the su mission# The forei"n indi$idual !as see+in" a $isa in order to enter the country to perform certain functions for a non0profit or"ani;ation# The DOJ attorney told O)A that he did not intend to "ain preferential treatment for the $isa applicant y identifyin" himself as a DOJ attorney' ut elie$ed his actions !ere consistent !ith !hat DOJ employees are permitted to do on ehalf of non0profit or"ani;ations# O)A concluded that the actions of the DOJ attorney !ere improper' ut not intentionally so# Section 2739#503 of the Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch prohi its employees from usin" their position or title for purposes of endorsement#

/0ou ob iously don1t kno, ,ho I am(2
The son of a ureau director !as denied a rental car ecause he !as too youn"# Outra"ed' his father !rote a scathin" letter 4on ("ency letterhead6 to the president of the rental car company' and sent it off in a U#S# posta"e0paid en$elope# The president of the company !as not amused and returned his scathin" response to the head of the ("ency# E

(s a result of his action' the -ureau Director !as treated to a four0hour ethics session and a fine for personal use of official posta"e#

3But4 5ud'e4 I didn1t 'et anythin'63
(n offshore safety inspector found much of the Go$ernment’s e.uipment to e in need of repairs to meet safety standards# Be then referred the usiness to his rother0in0 la!Ds repair shop# The ri" operators smelled a rat and called the &-2# They disco$ered that' in return for each referral' the rother0in0la! !as treatin" the inspector to an e$enin" !ith a lady of du ious morals# The case !as rou"ht to trial# 2n his defense' the inspector claimed that he had not recei$ed a Fthin" of $alueF in return for the referral# The *ud"e didnDt uy it 0 and neither did his !ife#

.se of Contractor Time
(lle"ations !ere made a"ainst a Department of Defense 4DoD6 official re"ardin" his use of contractor employees# The official directed t!o US Go$ernment contractors to entertain an ac.uaintance he met at a conference in =urope on his ehalf# They !ere directed to ta+e the person out to lunch as !ell as out on the to!n the follo!in" e$enin"# The contractors ri"htly elie$ed that the re.uest !as improper and as a result told the DoD official that they >had other plans#? The DoD official told them to >cancel them#? The contractors e$entually too+ the ac.uaintance out that e$enin" for se$eral hours# (fter an in$esti"ation' it !as determined that the DoD official had acted in $iolation of 9 C&A 2739#50: y utili;in" contractors’ time improperly# Bis super$isor counseled him and the proper reim ursements !ere made#

7eterans Affairs Super isors Push for Friends to be )ired
( re$ie! found in t!o instances that Department of ,eterans (ffairs medical center super$isors recommended the hirin" of close personal friends !ithout di$ul"in" the relationship to human resources staff mem ers# The re$ie! team recommended that disciplinary action e ta+en#


Interior *fficial Altered %eports and -eaked Confidential Information
The 2nterior Department’s 2nspector General found that a senior official had repeatedly altered scientific field reports to lessen the protections for imperiled species and ease the impact on lando!ners# The in$esti"ation also re$ealed the official' !ho !or+s in &ish and <ildlife Ser$ices' misused her position y disclosin" confidential information to pri$ate "roups see+in" to affect policy decisions# The 2nspector General referred the case to the Department Bead for >potential administrati$e action#? 4The Seattle Times' /arch 30' 20056

Bribery 8#9 .(S(C( : $;#"Type 7iolations<
The !odfather
( former Department of Defense employee used to refer to himself as >The Godfather? ecause of his a ility to influence the a!ardin" of construction contracts# Bo!e$er' li+e all "reat crime osses' this employee !as arrested for e%tortin" a @10'000 ri e# The Godfather accepted a @10'000 installment of a @:0'000 ri e from an underco$er a"ent in an attempt to secure a floorin" contract# The Godfather !as ta+en into custody#

-ucrati e Contractin'
( former (rmy officer had found a lucrati$e "i"G acceptin" cash payments for facilitatin" contractin" et!een 2ra.is and the U#S# "o$ernment durin" a deployment to -a"hdad# This particular officer accepted @35'900 in cash payment for these >facilitations#? The officer !as sentenced to prison' three years of super$ised release' and !as re.uired to pay @35'900 restitution to the U#S# Go$ernment#

Bribe for a Bulldo=er
( retired military employee plead "uilty to ta+in" ri es in e%chan"e for turnin" a lind eye !hile others stole hea$y e.uipment from the ase for resale# The man admitted to allo!in" items such as cranes' ulldo;ers' and front0end loaders to e ta+en from the ase# (s part of his


plea a"reement' the employee a"reed to forfeit the ri e proceeds' as !ell as to pay full restitution to the Department of Defense#

Fraud4 Conspiracy4 and Bribery > *h &y6
Criminal char"es put a computer contractor out of usiness and landed "o$ernment employees in *ail# T!o ci$ilian employees at a /ilitary Depot' alon" !ith the contractor’s "o$ernment sales mana"er' !ere con$icted on $arious conspiracy and ri ery char"es for defraudin" the U#S# Go$ernment under multiple contracts in return for cash and merchandise# The employees !ere part of a scheme in !hich they used "o$ernment funds to purchase laptops and recycled computer components from the contractor’s sales mana"er at inflated prices' and split the o$erchar"ed amounts amon" themsel$es# One employee recei$ed prison time' three years pro ation' and !as ordered to pay @30'000 in restitution# The other employee !as sentenced to 22 months in *ail' three years of pro ation' and ordered to pay @1E'000# The sales mana"er recei$ed a similar sentence# The computer contractor !as indicted on nine felony counts and su *ected to asset forfeiture of appro%imately @5#E million# The char"es !ere later !ithdra!n after the company filed for an+ruptcy# The in$esti"ation also resulted in fi$e other indi$iduals char"ed !ith prison time and ordered to pay a com ined @125'000 in restitution#

*ne thin' leads to another
( misuse of "o$ernment resources in$esti"ation hit une%pected pay dirt !hen it unco$ered a contractor procurement and ri ery scheme# 2n$esti"ators respondin" to a hotline tip su stantiated a misuse of funds claim !hen they found a ci$ilian utilities mana"er at a /ilitary command rented a 3900ton crane to mo$e electrical "enerators se$en days efore it !as neededH costin" the "o$ernment @39'000# The in$esti"ation also unco$ered a complicated contract id ri""in"' ri ery and +ic+ ac+ operation in$ol$in" the utilities mana"er and a Ser$ice contractor# The mana"er manipulated and sole0 sourced !or+ to the contractorH reportedly to dri$e usiness to the contractor in order to transition to a *o !ith them after his "o$ernment *o # The mana"er used "o$ernment funds to purchase e%pensi$e tools' plasma T,s' and laptop computers that turned up missin"# Be also allo!ed the contractor to use "o$ernment personnel' tools' and 11

e.uipment to do the contractor’s !or+# Be su mitted false in$oices on ehalf of the contractor' resultin" in a @1#3 million loss to the "o$ernment# (s a result of a plea deal for cooperation in additional procurement in$esti"ations' the mana"er !as sentenced to 19 months in prison and de arred from "o$ernment contractin" for four years# This in$esti"ation touched off fi$e separate criminal in$esti"ations a"ainst other contractors in that /ilitary Ser$ice re"ardin" alle"ations of id ri""in"#

Bribery and Fraud -ands Pro'ram &ana'er in 5ail
( )ro"ram /ana"er 4)/6 that !as responsi le for administerin" computer contracts recei$ed +ic+ ac+s and ran his o!n usiness defraudin" the Go$ernment# The )/ ne"otiated a deal !ith a contractor that raised the price of computer stora"e e.uipment y @900 a unit# The increase !as for >additional ser$ices? that !ere supposedly needed to resol$e a defect in the e.uipment# (n in$esti"ation determined that these ser$ices !ere unnecessary' and that the @900 !as paid to a shell company o!ned y the )/’s !ife# The @900 per unit !as *ust the start# Be also used a usiness that he controlled to purchase "eneric e.uipment and resell it to the Go$ernment as a name rand product far a o$e mar+et rate# These endea$ors pro$ed to e .uite lucrati$e' and the )/ profited a out @3#2 million on the schemes# The profit !as short0li$ed' ho!e$er' as the )/ !as indicted for ri ery and fraud# Be !as sentenced to fi$e years in prison' re.uired to repay the @3#2 million and char"ed a @2':00 fine#

Contractin' *fficial in Af'hanistan Pleads !uilty to Bribery
( Go$ernment employee at -a"ram (irfield' pled "uilty to acceptin" ri es in e%chan"e for a!ardin" Go$ernment contracts# The employee !as responsi le for e$aluatin" truc+in" contractors and assi"nin" each contractor days of !or+ each month ased on their performance# The employee !as approached y a contractor and ultimately accepted a !ireless telephone and @20'000 a month in e%chan"e for assi"nin" an e%tra day of !or+ each month to that contractor# Be also made a similar deal !ith another contractor for @19'000 a month# 2n all' the employee recei$ed a out @E5'000# Be !as sentenced to forty months in prison and three years of super$ised release#


&a?or @ron'doin'
( retired (rmy /a*or' Christopher B# /urray' pled "uilty to char"es of ri ery and ma+in" a false statement arisin" from his acti$ities at Camp (rif*an' Iu!ait# 2n 2009 and 2007' !hile ser$in" as a contractin" specialist at Camp (ri*an' /urray recei$ed appro%imately @229'000 in ri es from DOD contractors# 2n return' he recommended the a!ard of contracts for $arious "oods and ser$ices# /urray also admitted that he recei$ed an additional @20'000 in ri es from a DOD contractor in e%chan"e for the a!ard of a construction contract# /urray’s misconduct continued as he made false statements to federal a"ents in$esti"atin" his conduct# /urray’s sentencin" is pendin"' ut the ma%imum penalty for each of four ri ery counts is 19 years in prison and a @290'000 fine# The ma%imum penalty for ma+in" a false statement is fi$e years in prison and a @290'000 fine# 2n another ri ery case at Camp (rif*an' another (rmy /a*or' James /omon' Jr#' accepted cash ri es from fi$e DOD contractin" firms that supplied ottled !ater and other "oods and ser$ices to ases in Iu!ait# /omon' a contractin" officer at the camp' a!arded contracts and -lan+et )urchase ("reement calls to those contractors' recei$in" @9#E million as payment for his actions# /omon pled "uilty to ri ery and conspiracy to commit ri ery# Bis sentencin" is pendin"' ut' li+e /urray' /omon faces up to 19 years in prison and a @290'000 fine for each ri ery count' as !ell as fi$e years in prison for the conspiracy count# /omon has also a"reed to pay @9#E million in restitution#

Inhibitin' 7ictory
( /a*or in the U#S# (rmy Aeser$e pled "uilty to conspiracy and ri ery char"es related to DOD contracts at Camp ,ictory' 2ra.# (ccordin" to the char"in" document' Theresa Jeanne -a+er recei$ed money and other items' includin" a Barley Da$idson motorcycle' from a defense contractor' Aaman Corporation' and a former employee of another defense contractor' =lie Samir Chidiac# 2n return' -a+er con$eyed sensiti$e information and fraudulently a!arded contracts to the contractor# -a+er also canceled contracts that !ere a!arded to third party contractors and fraudulently re0a!arded them to Chidiac# -a+er’s sentencin" is pendin"' ut the ma%imum penalty for each of -a+er’s t!o ri ery counts is 19 years in prison and the "reater of a @290'000 fine and three times 13

the monetary e.ui$alent of the thin" of $alue recei$ed# -a+er !as also char"ed !ith t!o counts of conspiracy# =ach count comes !ith a ma%imum penalty of fi$e years in prison and a @290'000 fine#

Courtin' Trouble
( former official of the U#S# Ta% Court' &red &ernando Tim ol Jr#' !as sentenced to 1E months in prison and three years of super$ised release in connection !ith a ri ery conspiracy# Tim ol !as a facilities ser$ices officer in the &acilities /ana"ement Section of the U#S# Ta% Court# Tim ol !as responsi le for assistin" in the a!ard of contracts to contractors !ho pro$ided maintenance' construction' and other related ser$ice to the Court# Tim ol admitted to solicitin" and acceptin" o$er @12'000 from a "o$ernment contractor in e%chan"e for ri""in" the a!ard of at least si% inflated contracts# (s part of a plea a"reement and y order of the court' Tim ol also a"reed to pay restitution of @2:'1:3#

&oore &isconduct
&irst Jieutenant Ao ert /oore 4Aet#6 a"reed to pay @120'000 in restitution for acceptin" money from contractors in e%chan"e for the a!ard of DOD contracts# 2n addition to pleadin" "uilty to ri ery for the a!ard of contracts at -a"ram (irfield' (f"hanistan' /oore pled "uilty to conspiracy' admittin" to falsifyin" the num er of un+ers and arriers deli$ered at -a"ram' !hich resulted in DOD payin" for un+ers and arriers that !ere ne$er recei$ed# /oore also admitted falsifyin" dama"e reports for leased $ehicles' causin" DOD to pay for repairs not performed# T!o other officials' Christopher )# <est' an (rmy /a*or' and )atric+ <# -oyd' an (ir &orce /aster Ser"eant' li+e!ise pled "uilty to ri ery and conspiracy for related conduct# The t!o a"reed to pay @900'000 and @130'000' respecti$ely' in restitution to DOD#

Department Employee @orks to the Public Detriment
( ci$ilian =n"ineerin" Technician assi"ned to the )u lic <or+s Department at Ka$al (ir Station' Corpus Christi' TL recommended Contract Construction and &ence


Co# for a @193'000 contract# -ut ehind the scenes' the company had first a"reed to pay the Go$ernment employee @9'000 in e%chan"e for the recommendation' per the employee’s re.uest# The technician admitted to acceptin" the ri e in return for his official action that resulted in the contract a!ard# The Ka$y de arred the ci$ilian employee for three years' and he left &ederal ser$ice#

7A Employee Earns a AB"&onth Stay in the Slammer for Corruption
( Department of ,eterans (ffairs employee !as cau"ht demandin" and recei$in" +ic+ ac+s from a contractor doin" usiness !ith her a"ency# The ,( employee and the contractor a"reed that the employee !ould recommend the contractor’s ser$ices to her a"ency' and in return the contractor !ould "i$e the employee +ic+ ac+s from the inflated prices it char"ed the "o$ernment# 2n all' the employee recei$ed @119'000 in +ic+ ac+s' althou"h the scheme ended up costin" the "o$ernment much moreC et!een @:00'000 and @1 million# On a side note' the ,( employee !as also indicted for conductin" post0 "o$ernment employment ne"otiations !ith a company she !as doin" usiness !ith in her "o$ernment capacity#

Acceptin' !ifts from 7endor %esults in C#4;;; Fine
( U#S# )ostal Ser$ice 4US)S6 employee !ho accepted free tee time "olf "ames from a $endor had to e%plain his actions in &ederal court after a tipster informed in$esti"ators# (uthorities learned that the employee' !ho !as the mana"er of Deli$ery ,ehicle Operations' had played "olf !ith a $endor !ho !as in$ol$ed in a @100 million procurement !ith US)S# On that occasion' the employee had accepted payment for his "olf fees and his dinner# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered that o$er the course of the pre$ious year' the employee had also accepted appro%imately @2'000 in non0cash items 4includin" meals and "olf fees6 from the $endor# The employee pled "uilty to ri ery' and !as sentenced to one year unsuper$ised pro ation and a @1'000 fine# &or this employee' "olf turned into a $ery e%pensi$e sport#

EDchan'in' Contract for Computer Earns Prison Time
The FactsE The director of Aespiratory Care at a ,eterans (ffairs 4,(6 hospital in Shre$eport' Jouisiana' a"reed to push throu"h a ,( contract for a $endor' if the 19

$endor supplied her !ith a laptop computer# The ,( )olice and Security Ser$ice' as they are !ont to do' in$esti"ated and disco$ered this quid pro quo# The director !as cau"ht and pleaded "uilty to solicitin" and recei$in" ille"al "ifts# She !as sentenced to 9 months in prison' to e follo!ed y 5 months of home confinement' and ordered to pay restitution of @80:# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' &e # 2001#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2014c64164-6 420036 for ids any pu lic official from acceptin" anythin" of $alue in e%chan"e for an official act to e performed' or ecause of any official act already performed# ,iolations of this la! can merit fines' imprisonment for up to 2 years' or oth#

Askin' for a Bribe F )a e 0ou -ost 0our &indG
The FactsE (n employee at the Defense /e"aCenter at Ielly (ir &orce -ase' Te%as' !as !or+in" as a mem er of a source e$aluation committee re$ie!in" contract proposals for a @9 million contract !hen he struc+ on this in"enious ideaG (s+ one of the potential contractors for a ri e in e%chan"e for his appro$al of the contractor’s proposalN The contractor apparently didn’t thin+ that this !as such a "ood idea' ho!e$er# 2t contacted the Defense Criminal 2n$esti"ati$e Ser$ice' !hich in$esti"ated the case alon" !ith the (ir &orce# The in$esti"ation included usin" an underco$er a"ent' paradin" as the contractor’s representati$e' payin" the employee the ri e# Ba$in" een cau"ht !ith his hand in the coo+ie *ar' the employee pleaded "uilty to acceptin" a ri e and !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and ordered to participate in a mental health pro"ram Cperhaps an appropriate remedy for !hat pro$ed to e a lame0 rained scheme# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' &e # 2001#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2014 64264(6 420036 ars pu lic officials and any persons selected to e pu lic officials from see+in" anythin" of $alue in return for > ein" influenced # # # in the performance of any official act#? The penalty for $iolatin" this la! can include fines' imprisonment for up to 19 years' or oth' alon" !ith possi le dis.ualification from holdin" >any office of honor' trust' or profit? !ith the United States Go$ernment#


Don+t Be Too !racious a !ift"!etter 6
The FactsE (n employee of the /aritime (dministration 4/(A(D6' a di$ision of the Department of Transportation' o$ersa! contracts for ship repairs# Be also sa! a contractor pro$idin" him !ith nice "ifts to re!ard his !or+Cincludin" a lar"e0screen T, and a ,CA# <hat could e !ron" !ith thatO )lenty' accordin" to the U#S# (ttorney' !ho deli$ered to this "racious "ift0"etter a four0month prison sentence' to e follo!ed y one year of pro ation' and an order for restitution in the amount of @5':70# The other "ifts the employee could ha$e refusedH these he !as compelled to ta+e# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' &e # 2001#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2014c64164-6 420036 for ids any pu lic official from acceptin" anythin" of $alue in e%chan"e for an official act' or "i$en for an official act already ta+en# ( $iolation of this la! can result in fines' imprisonment for up to 2 years' or oth#

Not So &uch of a Bri'ht Bulb 6
The FactsE ( former super$isor in the -ureau of 2ndian (ffairs used a Go$ernment0issue credit card to purchase e%cessi$e .uantities of o$erpriced li"ht ul s from a Korth Da+ota company# 2n e%chan"e for his act as a poor shopper' he accepted @21'000 in ri es# &or his sa$$y purchasin"' he !as sentenced to one year and nine months in prison and ordered to pay @52'000 in restitution# The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2014 6 420036 for ids &ederal employees from 4amon" other thin"s6 see+in" or recei$in" anythin" of $alue in return for ein" influenced in the performance of an official act or to commit or to assist the commission of any fraud a"ainst the United States# 2t mandates fines' imprisonment for up to 19 years' or oth' alon" !ith dis.ualification from holdin" >any office of honor' trust' or profit under the United States#?

FAA Employee Sentenced for Bribery
( former employee of the &ederal ($iation (dministration 4&((6 !as con$icted of ri ery# 2n carryin" out his primary responsi ility of re$ie!in" and processin" applications for &((0issued pilot certificates' the employee accepted ri es of @2'000


and an all0e%pense paid trip to Iorea in e%chan"e for preferential treatment of applications for Iorean pilots from the fli"ht school' <in"s O$er (merica# The employee !as sentenced to pay a @2'000 fine and ser$e four months in prison' follo!ed y three years pro ation for $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2014 6426# -ri ery occurs !hen a pu lic official see+s or accepts anythin" of $alue in return for ein" influenced in the performance of an official act#

Social Security Administration Employee1s Bribery Try Ends in Prison
( Social Security (dministration employee and her hus and !ere con$icted for solicitin" ri es from indi$iduals see+in" Social Security enefits for themsel$es or family mem ers# The couple approached citi;ens !ho !ere ha$in" difficulty .ualifyin" for Supplemental Social Security enefits# They !ould offer to arran"e to ha$e enefits reinstated or to complete paper!or+ for the indi$idual# (fter!ards' they demanded payment for their ser$ices# (t their 1885 trial in Jouisiana' a *ud"e ordered the employee to :7 months imprisonment follo!ed y three years pro ation# The employeeDs hus and recei$ed 30 months imprisonment follo!ed y three years pro ation# They each paid ac+ @23'E08#33# The offense of ri ery occurs !hen a pu lic official see+s or accepts anythin" of $alue in return for ein" influenced in the performance of an official act#

Na y Employee Sentenced for !ratuity *ffense
( Ka$y electrical foreman !as sentenced for acceptin" @8'300 in ille"al "ratuities from a Go$ernment contractor# The foreman !as con$icted of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 201 and !as sentenced to 37 months pro ation and a @10'000 fine# The electrical foreman assisted a Go$ernment contractor in o tainin" a contract !ith the Ka$al (ir <arfare Center 4K(<C6# The foreman had authority o$er certain Ka$y contracts relatin" to K(<C ase maintenance#

Con'ressional Aide Sentenced for Corrupt Acti ities
( former staff assistant to a U#S# Con"ressman !as con$icted of t!o counts of acceptin" "ratuities 41E U#S#C# 2016 and one count of de$isin" and carryin" out a scheme 1E

to defraud the Go$ernment 41E U#S#C# 13:16# The aide !as sentenced to 1E months imprisonment on each count follo!ed y t!o years pro ation# The staff assistant accepted @3'500 for assistin" indi$iduals in o tainin" permanent residency status y sendin" endorsements on the Con"ressmanDs letterhead to the 2mmi"ration and Katurali;ation Ser$ice 42KS6# The aide !as also in$ol$ed in a scheme to defraud aliens see+in" permanent residency# The aide told the aliens that if they !ere mem ers in the Se$enth Day (d$entist Church' they !ould e eli"i le for permanent resident status e$en thou"h the 2KS Special Aeli"ious 2mmi"rant <or+ )ro"ram co$ers only church !or+ers and their immediate families !ho are employed y a reli"ious or"ani;ation# The aliens !ere informed that for a fee' the aide !ould assist them in applyin" !ith the 2KS# The aide recei$ed appro%imately @:00'000 from 1'000 aliens#

).D *fficial and %ealtor Imprisoned for Bribery Scheme
( former official at the U#S# Department of Bousin" and Ur an De$elopment 4BUD6 !as sentenced for his role in a ri ery scheme in$ol$in" BUD properties# The former official !as paid ri es y a realtor !ho in e%chan"e !as sold BUD properties at lo!er than their appraised $alues# The ri es totaled o$er @E0'000' includin" a -/< automo ile# 2n return the BUD official sold the realtor 20 BUD properties at one0third of their appraised $alue# The realtor then resold the properties at their full mar+et $alue# 2n addition to other char"es' oth the BUD official and the realtor plead "uilty to one count of 1E U#S#C# 201 each# The BUD official !as sentenced to a 2:0month prison term follo!ed y 3 years pro ation and !as ordered to pay @1#: million in restitution# The realtor !as sentenced to a 250month prison term follo!ed y 3 years pro ation and !as also ordered to pay @1#: million in restitution#

.nited States Customs Ser ice Special A'ent Takes Informant Payoff Funds
-e"innin" in June 18E5' the a"ent !or+ed !ith an informant !ho pro$ided assistance to the Customs Ser$ice in criminal in$esti"ations# One of the a"ent’s duties !as to monitor and assess the !or+ of the informant# Durin" a period of se$eral years' the informant recei$ed a num er of payments from the Customs Ser$ice as compensation 18

for his ser$ices as informant# On one or more occasions' the informant e%pressed "ratitude for the a"ent’s assistance y o ser$in" that oth he and the a"ent had en"a"ed in hard !or+ for !hich the informant !ould recei$e su stantial compensation' ut for !hich the a"ent only !ould recei$e his salary# The informant offered to share !ith the a"ent a portion of his earnin"s from the Customs Ser$ice# 2n (pril 1882' the a"ent nominated the informant for a lar"e payment' !hich represented a portion of the $alue of certain assets forfeited as a result of information pro$ided y the informant# The a"ent then initiated a telephone con$ersation !ith the informant in !hich he as+ed the informant for money# Durin" (u"ust 1882' the informant !ent to San &rancisco to recei$e the payment# The a"ent personally "a$e the informant a United States Treasury chec+ in the amount of @110'E59# <hile ridin" in a Go$ernment0o!ned $ehicle' the informant attempted to hand the a"ent an en$elope !ith @:'000 in cash# The a"ent responded that the informant should drop the en$elope in the car ecause he could not accept the cash directly# The informant left the money in the car and the a"ent reco$ered it# The a"ent pled "uilty pursuant to a plea a"reement to a char"e of a criminal $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' ille"al supplementation of salary# Under the plea a"reement' the a"ent a"reed to the imposition of a fine of @:'000 y the Court' to not see+ employment !ith any &ederal' state' or local la! enforcement ("ency' and to pay a special assessment of @29# 2n e%chan"e for these a"reements' the United States a"reed to mo$e to dismiss the 2ndictment char"in" the a"ent !ith a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2014c6 4164-6 and not to prosecute him for any other criminal offense relatin" to his receipt of @:'000 from the informant#

!ratuity Accepted In EDchan'e for Immi'ration Ser ices
( pastor su mitted an application for permanent residence to the United States Department of Justice' 2mmi"ration and Katurali;ation Ser$ice 42KS6# The Southeastern Conference of Se$enth0Day (d$entists 4Southeastern Conference6 !anted the pastor to minister to t!o of its con"re"ations in /iami# On (u"ust 15' 1880' a Con"ressman sent a letter to 2KS on ehalf of the pastor# On /ay 31' 1881' a second letter from the Con"ressman' this time si"ned y the pastor as !ell' !as sent to 2KS# -oth letters !ere


!ritten on Con"ressional stationery# On (u"ust 21' 1881' the pastor’s application for permanent residence !as appro$ed# On July E' 1883' the Con"ressional staffer !ho or"ani;ed the scheme recei$ed a @900 "ratuity from the Southeastern Conference for her efforts on ehalf of the pastor# The staffer used the same scheme to assist another pastor in o tainin" permanent residence so that he could ser$e as minister for t!o of the Southeastern ConferenceDs con"re"ations# The Con"ressman !rote to 2KS on July 27' 1883' on ehalf of the second pastor and the Southeastern Conference# The staffer assisted the second pastor in his dealin"s !ith 2KS# On (u"ust 3' 1883' 2KS appro$ed the pastor’s petition for residence and' on &e ruary 3' 188:' the staffer recei$ed a @900 "ratuity from the Southeastern Conference for her efforts on ehalf of the pastor# On (pril 27' 188:' another forei"n national paid the staffer @2'500 for assistin" her in applyin" for permanent residence# The staffer su mitted a petition to 2KS on the person’s ehalf and si"ned the application as the preparer# (lthou"h the application contained a si"nature' !hich purported to e that of the staffer' she claimed that it !as not her si"nature and that she did not see the application prior to its su mission# The staffer +ne! that the forei"n national !as not eli"i le to ecome a permanent resident of the U#S# ut fraudulently misrepresented to her that she !as eli"i le in order to induce her to utili;e the staffer’s ser$ices# The staffer !as char"ed !ith t!o counts of acceptin" "ratuities for official acts performed' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2014c64164-6 and +no!in"ly ma+in" a material false !ritin" and presentin" it to 2KS' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 1001# She !as also char"ed !ith acceptin" compensation for ser$ices pro$ided in relation to matters in !hich the United States has a direct and su stantial interest' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2034a6416' and mail fraud' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 13:1# The staffer pled "uilty to the fi$e0count indictment on Septem er 30' 1887' and !as sentenced to 1E months of incarceration on (pril 1E' 1885#

&ultiple Char'es Brou'ht A'ainst Air Force *fficer and Accomplice for Soft,are Scheme
(n (ir &orce officer !as dis"runtled after recei$in" notification that he !ould not e promoted and !as soon to e dischar"ed !ithout a retirement annuity# Be conspired !ith a ase !arehouse super$isor 4!hile also see+in" employment !ith him6 to 21

unla!fully transfer superseded soft!are from the /acDill (&- !arehouse he super$ised to a pri$ate company for su se.uent sale# Be arran"ed !ith the super$isor to remo$e soft!are called Oracle Tools and Data ase 4Oracle6# The (ir &orce officer o tained possession of o$er 87 o%es of Oracle soft!are y ma+in" false statements in !ritin" in an effort to "ain authori;ation from his superiors to ha$e the soft!are destroyed in place# Destruction of superseded soft!are !as the responsi ility of the Go$ernment accordin" to its a"reements !ith soft!are contractors# The (ir &orce officer !or+ed under the pretense that the Oracle soft!are !as ein" turned o$er to a company for destruction# 2nstead' the officer pro$ided the Oracle soft!are to a mo$in" company that transported the o%es from /acDill to a commercial stora"e facility rented y the !arehouse super$isor# Once in possession of the soft!are' he searched for uyers of the soft!are# Ori"inally' the U#S# Central Command had paid the Go$ernment ul+ rate of @58'000 for the Oracle soft!are in 1881# On the "ray mar+et' this soft!are !as $alued et!een @39'000 and @100'000# The officer !as con$icted of a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E 4!or+in" on a pro*ect that affected a company in !hich he had a financial interest6' !hile his co0defendant' the !arehouse super$isor' !as con$icted of $iolations of 1E U#S#C# 2014 6416' 1E U#S#C# 7:1 4theft of Go$ernment property6 and 1E U#S#C# 351 4conspiracy6# The officer !as sentenced to 1 year pro ation and 190 hours community ser$ice# The !arehouse super$isor !as imprisoned for 25 months !ith super$ised release for 3 years#

State Department %e'ional Security *fficer 8%S*< at the American Embassy in Santo Domin'o4 Dominican %epublic Dri es Automobile Scheme
The ASO’s primary duties included o$erseein" a small force of U#S# /arines and a lar"er force of security "uards# <hile the ASO had no authority to enter into procurement transactions on the Go$ernmentDs ehalf' he did' in t!o separate transactions' en"ineer the purchase of ei"ht $ehicles for the security company and some pri$ate citi;ens# The security company’s contract !ith the Go$ernment re.uired that it use three $ehicles for patrols# These $ehicles !ere purchased in the United States and !ere free from su stantial import duties !hen deli$ered to the Dominican Aepu lic y


$irtue of applications y the United States =m assy for Fe%onerationsF from the duties# =%onerations are "i$en for property to e used y forei"n missions# <ith respect to the purchase of the first four $ehicles' the ASO !as "i$en @90'000 y the security company# The ASO carried at least @38'000 in cash to /iami' !hich he ille"ally failed to disclose to customs officials' and purchased : $ehicles for @38'000# The ASO +ept the remainin" @11'000# Jater' !hen the ASO purchased four $ehicles for indi$iduals' he !as "i$en @99'000 in cash# Be returned to /iami !ith at least @39'000 in cash' !hich a"ain he failed to report to Customs' and paid @39'000 for four $ehicles !hich !ere sent to Santo Domin"o and Fe%oneratedF from import duty after the ASO encoura"ed the e%oneration process and initiated some of the paper!or+ throu"h an em assy employee# The ASO retained the unspent @20'000 difference et!een the purchase amount and the amount he had een "i$en to purchase the cars# The security company also !as re.uired to pro$ide !eapons for its security force# The ASO arran"ed to purchase the !eapons for the security company y first attemptin" to ha$e certain firearm companies or retailers ship the !eapons to the Dominican Aepu lic' not!ithstandin" the fact that the ASO did not ha$e a license to e%port the !eapons# These companies refused to sell the !eapons to the ASO# Su se.uently' he purchased the !eapons from a -altimore "un shop after usin" =m assy letterhead and representin" that he !as authori;ed to purchase !eapons for the State Department# The "un shop refused to ship the !eapons to the ASO# The ASO then !ent to -altimore and personally purchased the !eapons and sent them in a lead0lined diplomatic o% to the Dominican Aepu lic# The ASO "a$e most of the !eapons to the security company' ut sold some e%tras that he purchased to citi;ens of the Dominican Aepu lic at considera le profit# Be also +ept for himself the difference of @2000 et!een the amount that the security company had "i$en him to purchase the "uns and the amount that the "un purchase had cost him# The ASO !as char"ed !ith ma+in" false statements to a firearms dealer' recei$in" somethin" of $alue for performance of an official act in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 201' participatin" as a Go$ernment employee in a transaction in !hich he had a financial interest in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E' stealin" ammunition !ith a $alue in e%cess of @100 from the United States' e%portin" firearms !ithout a license' transportin" monetary instruments into the United States for the purpose of carryin" on a $iolation of the (rms


Control =%port (ct' and failin" to ma+e a true report to the Customs Ser$ice !hen carryin" @10'000 or more into the United States# The *ury con$icted the ASO on the 201 count and the count of the indictment pertainin" to e%portin" firearms !ithout a license#

Postal Employee Demanded Payoffs to Deli er Benefit Checks
Ba$in" een tipped off that a letter carrier !as demandin" money from people on his route in e%chan"e for deli$ery of "eneral assistance chec+s' the )ostal Ser$ice esta lished sur$eillance and taped a con$ersation in !hich the letter carrier su""ested that the customer ma+e a Fone0timeF payment of @19 to ensure deli$ery of her chec+s# The letter carrier accepted the payment' !hich had een mar+ed in ad$ance of its transfer# The letter carrier !as indicted under 1E U#S#C# 2014c64164-6 for acceptin" money in e%chan"e for performin" an official duty# (fter plea ne"otiations' he pled "uilty to a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' for acceptin" compensation for official duties from a source other than the Go$ernment# Be !as sentenced to three yearsD pro ation' !ith 70 days at a community treatment center#

Employee Con icted for Steerin' Contracts to Supplier
( Go$ernment technician and a co0!or+er !ent to a manufacturer and offered to ensure that the manufacturer recei$ed ("ency contracts in return for a hefty Ffinders fee#F The manufacturer' unfortunately for these enterprisin" employees' !ent to the &-2' !hich set up a stin" operation and arrested the technician# (t trial' the technician' e$er so cle$er' ar"ued that he could not e found "uilty of ri ery ecause he !as not a contractin" officer' and therefore did not ha$e the authority to a!ard contracts to the manufacturer# The court re*ected this ar"ument after listenin" to testimony on the role of technicians as far as pro$idin" e%pert information that contractin" officers rely upon' and upheld the con$iction of the technician# The offense of ri ery occurs !hen a pu lic official see+s or accepts anythin" of $alue in return for ein" influenced in the performance of an official act# Such acts include "i$in" ad$ice' ma+in" recommendations' and conductin" in$esti"ations as !ell as ma+in" decisions#


Please Call &e /Doctor2 Inmate
One enterprisin" &ederal employee cut a deal !ith a local uni$ersity 0 they "a$e him an honorary )h#D# in pu lic administration in return for his si"nin" a me"a0 uc+ "rant for the uni$ersity# 4O $iously' he had "reat e%pertise in )u lic (dministration#6 The offense of ri ery occurs !hen a pu lic official see+s or accepts anythin" of $alue 4such as an honorary de"ree6 in return for ein" influenced in the performance of an official act#

A'riculture Employee Sou'ht for Appro in' Fraudulent -oans
( former employee of the Department of ("riculture is !anted for recruitin" his friends to fraudulently apply for farm loans and then "i$in" him money in e%chan"e for appro$in" the loans# The former employee helped his non0farmer co0conspirators to fill out the re.uired forms !ith the information re.uired for appro$al# Under this scheme' the former employee appro$ed loans totalin" @1#E million# Be collected @3:0'000 for himself# The former employee has een char"ed !ith 8E counts includin" 97 for ri ery#

Se en A'riculture Inspectors Sentenced for Bribery Scheme
Se$en U#S# Dept# of ("riculture fruit and $e"eta le inspectors !ere con$icted of operatin" a scheme in !hich they recei$ed cash payments from fruit and $e"eta le !holesalers in return for the inspectors assi"nin" lo!er "rades to their produce# The lo!er "rade meant that the !holesaler could pay the "ro!er a lo!er price for the produce and then re0sell it at the hi"her "rade# (ll pled "uilty to one count of ri ery each# -ri ery occurs !hen a pu lic official see+s or accepts anythin" of $alue 4such as cash6 in return for ein" influenced in the performance of an official act 4such as assi"nin" produce "rades6#

INS Inspector Accepts Bribes
( former 2mmi"ration and Katurali;ation Ser$ice inspector !as sentenced for acceptin" ri es in return for allo!in" smu""lers to import cocaine into the United States across the order !ith /e%ico# Be accepted @59'000 in ri es in return for allo!in" o$er 1'000 pounds of cocaine to enter the country#


The former 2KS inspector !as con$icted of ri ery and !as sentenced to 30 months imprisonment follo!ed y three years pro ation#

Former Federal )i'h,ay Administration *fficial and @ife En'a'e in Corrupt Scheme
( former &B<( employee and his !ife !ere sentenced for en"a"in" in a ri ery and +ic+ ac+ scheme in$ol$in" traffic en"ineerin" contracts# The former employee improperly told a contractor that they !ould pro a ly !in a contract# 2n return' the contractor "ranted a su 0contract to the &B<( employee’s !ife’s >consultin" firm#? The employee’s !ife had no hi"h!ay en"ineerin" education or e%perience# She recei$ed o$er @100'000 in Go$ernment contracts# 2n addition to other char"es' the former employee pled "uilty to one count of ri ery#

7A Employee Con icted of Acceptin' Ille'al !ratuities
( former employee of the U#S# Department of ,eterans (ffairs !as sentenced for solicitin" and acceptin" "ratuities from a ,( $endor# Be recei$ed three computers' airline tic+ets' and hotel accommodations from se$eral ,( $endors# Be !as also char"ed !ith demandin" a fourth computer and round trip tic+ets to Jas ,e"as from another $endor# The former employee pled "uilty to one count of $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 201#

I%S *fficial Con icted for Steerin' Contracts
( former 2AS official !as sentenced in US District Court for acceptin" ri es in return for directin" 2AS computin" contracts to certain companies and for failin" to report the ri es on his income ta% returns# Be pled "uilty to one count of ri ery and to one count of filin" a false ta% return' and recei$ed a 35 month prison term and three years’ pro ation as a result# -ri ery occurs !hen a pu lic official see+s or accepts anythin" of $alue in return for ein" influenced in the performance of an official act#


Special *perations Command Bribery Scandal Nabs T,o %etired *fficers
T!o retired military officers at SOCO/ found themsel$es in federal court after the re$elation of a scheme to funnel defense contracts to companies !illin" to pro$ide lucrati$e +ic+ ac+s# The first official !as a retired (rmy lieutenant colonel' and !as employed y SOCO/ as a contractor char"ed !ith e$aluatin" !eapons desi"ned for the special operations forces# The second official !as a retired (rmy colonel' !ho !as chief of special pro"rams at SOCO/# )rosecutors alle"e that the retired colonel formed a pri$ate consultin" company in order to represent companies see+in" to "et part of SOCO/’s @1#E illion procurement ud"et# The consultin" company then made ille"al payments to the retired lieutenant colonel in e%chan"e for his fa$ora le re$ie!s of their clients’ !eapons# The retired lieutenant colonel pled "uilty to federal ri ery char"es# (lthou"h he faced 19 years in prison' his e%emplary ser$ice and cooperation !ith in$esti"ators earned him a reduced sentence of three years of super$ised pro ation' si% months of home detention' and @:900 in fines# The retired colonel has maintained his innocence' and faces up to 19 years in prison and @290'000 in fines#

IraH Contractor Cau'ht Takin' C# &illion in Bribes
( former contractin" officer for the 2ra.i coalition "o$ernment pled "uilty to acceptin" o$er @1 million in ri es in return for steerin" contracts to a contractor !ith companies in 2ra. and Aomania# The officer !as a con$icted felon !hen he !as hired y a U#S# company' !hich su se.uently !on a contract !ith the U#S# to pro$ide controllers to 2ra.i re"ions# The officer !as put in char"e of o$er @E2 million in fundin" for an area south of -a"hdad# Be .uic+ly e"an acceptin" ri es in the form of cash' cars' *e!elry' and se%ual fa$ors from !omen pro$ided y a contractor' in e%chan"e for steerin" lucrati$e contracts in the contractor’s direction# 2n$esti"ators reco$ered incriminatin" email traffic' includin" one email from the official to the contractor e%claimin"' >2 lo$e to "i$e you moneyN? Jater in$esti"ations sho!ed that much of the contracted !or+ !as ne$er completed# (lso implicated in the scandal !as a retired (rmy lieutenant colonel' !ho also !or+ed as a contractin" officer in the re"ion# Be !as accused of funnelin" contracts to the same contractor in e%chan"e for lucrati$e +ic+ ac+s' includin" a ne! carH 25

he also !as accused of simply stealin" lar"e amounts of money from reconstruction funds !hich he then smu""led into the U#S# The official pled "uilty to ri ery' conspiracy' and money0launderin"' as !ell as char"es connected !ith his ille"al possession of at least 90 firearms' includin" machine "uns and "renade launchers# Be a!aits sentencin"' and faces up to 30 years for the conspiracy char"e alone# The contractor pled "uilty to conspiracy' ri ery' and money0 launderin"# Be faces up to :0 years in prison' fi$e years of super$ised release and a fine of @590'000# Be also must repay the "o$ernment @3#7 million and forfeit @3#7 million in assets# The lieutenant colonels case is still pendin"# (Source: Washington Post, February 2, 2 !" #pril $!, 2 !%

Car'o Contractor Faces I 0ears for Bribery
( Ka$y contractor at the Space and Ka$al <arfare Systems Center Charleston Detachment pled "uilty to acceptin" ri es from a frei"ht for!ardin" company# 2n e%chan"e for a!ardin" frei"ht transportation contracts to the company' the contractor recei$ed items $alued at more than @10'000' includin" e%tra$a"ant dinners' concert and K(SC(A tic+ets' !ee+ends at a ed0and0 rea+fast' *e!elry' and >spa days? at a department store# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered that coincidentally' the frei"ht company’s usiness !as $irtually none%istent efore the contractor e"an a!ardin" them contracts that e$entually totaled o$er @500'000# The contractor faces up to fi$e years in prison and a @290'000 fine# She is the se$enth defendant connected to an in$esti"ation of payoffs et!een frei"ht for!ardin" companies and "o$ernment contractors# (Source: &P', (arch 2 , 2 !%

!ift"!i in' Contractor Faces I 0ears for Bribery
The o!ner of a car"o company in ,ir"inia -each faces fi$e years in prison after "i$in" thousands of dollars in "ifts to federal contract officers at the Korfol+ Ka$al Shipyard in e%chan"e for lucrati$e military shippin" contracts# One federal contract officer' !ho had !or+ed for the "o$ernment for 29 years' recei$ed free lunches and dinners' an open ta at a delicatessen' airline tic+ets' concert and K(SC(A tic+ets' ci"ars' and a @7'000 Jacu;;i# The $ice president of the o!ner’s car"o company !as also


indicted for ri es to another Korfol+ federal contract officer totalin" o$er @59'000# 2n return for these "ifts' the o!ner’s company recei$ed o$er @7:0'000 in shippin" contracts# The o!ner faces up to fi$e years in prison and @290'000 in fines# The t!o contract officers oth pled "uiltyH the first has een sentenced to :: months in prison' and the other a!aits sentencin"# (Source: )ampton *e+s, $ ,2-, -%

Employees Fail to Profit from %ed Tape
T!o !or+ers at the ,eterans (ffair’s Consolidated /ail Outpatient )harmacy' !hich mails prescriptions to $eterans' !ere char"ed !ith ta+in" +ic+ ac+s for purchasin" a product from a supplier at more than t!ice the normal price# The productO Aed tape# The employees !ere char"ed !ith purchasin" 100'000 rolls of the tape' !hich is stamped !ith the !ord >security? and is meant to deter tamperin"' at @7#89 a roll rather than its @2#90 retail $alue# 2n return' they recei$ed +ic+ ac+s of more than @1 per roll# The duo !ill ha$e plenty of time to appreciate the irony of their situation' as they face a sentence of 19 years in *ail#

%esellin' Commissary !oods -ands T,o in Court
( scheme to resell military commissary atteries on the lac+ mar+et resulted in char"es filed a"ainst a $eteran and a Department of Defense employee# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered that the $eteran !as ri in" the employee to sell him lar"e .uantities of atteries from a commissary' !hich the $eteran then resold at a profit to a distri utor# Durin" a one0year period' the employee sold the $eteran @590'000 !orth of atteries' !hich netted a @20'000 profit on the lac+ mar+et# The $eteran +ept @11'000 of the proceeds' and +ic+ed ac+ the remainin" @8000 to the employee# The $eteran pled "uilty to a misdemeanor char"e of supplementin" the salary of a &ederal employee' and !as sentenced to one year of pro ation# The employee !as char"ed !ith ri ery and ta+en to court# 2t is ille"al for indi$iduals to either pay or recei$e salary supplements for ser$ices performed y Go$ernment employees related to their Go$ernment duties#


Acceptin' Jickbacks Earns Contractor ## 0ears
( federal in$esti"ation into ri ery ended in three fraud con$ictions for the Chief of )lans' Ae.uirements' and (c.uisitions for the Defense Systems ("ency at the Ka$y Ship )arts Control Center# The Department of Defense employee accepted @900'000 in cash in e%chan"e for a!ardin" @1E#1 million in contracts to an information technolo"y company# The in$esti"ation also unco$ered a scheme y the employee' his rother' and his nephe! to defraud an en$ironmental remediation usiness y su mittin" phony in$oices for more than @57'000# The employee !as also con$icted for lyin" a out his !ife’s disa ility status to the Social Security (dministration# This trio of offenses earned the employee 11 years in federal prison' !here he !ill ha$e a family reunion !ith his rother and nephe! as !ell as his dau"hter' !ho !as con$icted of ma+in" false statements to the "rand *ury# (Source: .or/ 0aily Record, (arch 21, 2 !%

I%S Employee !oes to 5ail for Acceptin' !ifts
2n the course of collectin" the de t from a construction company' an 2AS Ae$enue ("ent ecame friends !ith the o!ner# Such "ood friends' that the a"ent accepted free "ames of "olf from the o!ner' as !ell as a num er of free dinners at restaurants# 2ndeed' the o!ner and the a"ent !ere such pals that the o!ner presented the a"ent !ith a cashier’s chec+ for @1:'800' !hich he su se.uently used to purchase a car# Unsurprisin"ly' the a"ent admitted that the "ifts ad$ersely affected his collection of the construction company’s outstandin" de t# The a"ent recei$ed three years in *ail and si% months of home confinement for an Unla!ful (ct of a Ae$enue Officer#

Postal Ser ice @orker Faces 5ail Time for Bribery
( U#S# )ostal Ser$ice 4US)S6 employee responsi le for recei$in" and a!ardin" ids on US)S printin" orders !as arrested for tradin" Go$ernment contracts for cash# The employee funneled $alua le contracts to the o!ner of a <ashin"ton D#C# printin" usiness in e%chan"e for payments of @11'959 to the employee’s di$orce la!yer# O$er the course of the in$esti"ation' authorities unco$ered four other printin" companies that admitted payin" ri es to the former US)S employee#


The printin" usiness o!ner pled "uilty to ri ery' and faces up to t!o years in prison and a @290'000 fine# The US)S employee’s case is pendin" in court#

Compensation for %epresentational Ser ices from Non"Federal Sources 8#9 .(S(C( : $;K"Type 7iolations<
@antedE Employee @ho @ill Not Skip &eetin's to Inter ie, ,ith *ther Companies
(n (rmy -ri"adier General participated personally and su stantially as an ad$ocate and appro$al authority in the effort to increase fundin" on a tas+ order !ith a Go$ernment contractor e$en !hile acti$ely see+in" employment !ith that company# Bis efforts did not rise to the le$el of >ne"otiatin"? employment so he did not $iolate the criminal prohi ition of 1E U#S#C# M20E' ut !as still in $iolation of C#&#A# 2739#70: !hen he too+ official action on ehalf of a company !ith !hich he !as see+in" employment instead of dis.ualifyin" himself from the particular matter# Be also e%tended official tra$el time and claimed unauthori;ed tra$el e%penses in order to "o to *o inter$ie!s and participate in other *o see+in" acti$ities to the point of actually e%cusin" himself from official meetin"s# &inally' he char"ed unauthori;ed personal phone calls to the Go$ernment and ordered su ordinates to run personal errands for him' includin" pic+in" up his dry cleanin"' dri$in" him to the ar er shop' and puttin" the license plates on his personal car 4also directin" them to use an official Go$ernment $ehicle for these purposes6# The General’s eha$ior $iolated the Joint =thics Ae"ulation ecause he used &ederal personnel' e.uipment' and duty time to conduct personal usiness# Bis official participation in a particular matter on ehalf of a company !ith !hich he !as see+in" employment $iolated conflict of interest la!# Bis other acti$ities amounted to misuse of Go$ernment resources 4his su ordinates’ time and the Go$ernment car6 and improper "ift acceptance 4due to a failure to reim urse su ordinates for e%penditures such as milea"e used !hen performin" his personal ser$ices6# (s if that !as not enou"h of an ethical rap sheet' he $iolated DoD Directi$e 5000#1:0A !hen he decided to char"e at least 19 of his TDP transactions to his personal credit card instead of his Go$ernment tra$el card so that he could recei$e onus point or air miles on the card#


The General !as su *ect to (rticle 19 proceedin"s under the Uniform Code of /ilitary Justice' fined @9'000' and directed to reim urse the Go$ernment @9'300 for the improper cell phone use and o$erpayment of TDP e%penses# Be !as allo!ed to retire at his current "rade' O05#

%eceipt of Income by Federal Employee %esults in #9 .(S(C( $;K 7iolation
( former employee of the Department of Transportation !as sentenced in the U#S# District Court for the =astern District of Te%as for recei$in" unauthori;ed compensation from a Go$ernment contractor for performin" Go$ernment duties# The employee' in his capacity as a Super$isory /arine Sur$eyor for the /aritime (dministration' accepted compensation from -G2 =nterprise' 2nc# for pro$idin" representational ser$ices in preparin" a id pac+a"e for a @1 million U#S# Coast Guard contract to remo$e sun+en ar"es from the 2ntracoastal <ater!ay in Te%as# The employee pled "uilty to one count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 203' and the Go$ernment dropped its char"e of ma+in" false statements to the Go$ernment and failure to report the receipt of the unauthori;ed compensation on his annual financial disclosure form# The employee !as sentenced to a one0year pro ation and ordered to pay a @2'900 fine# Under this criminal statute' in "eneral' &ederal employees may not accept compensation for representin" someone else efore a &ederal a"ency on particular matters in !hich the United States is a party#

INS Employee Accepts Ille'al Payments
( clerical employee of the 2mmi"ration and Katurali;ation Ser$ice 42KS6 too+ money in e%chan"e for assistin" in processin" 2KS employment authori;ation documents# She pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2034a6416' for recei$in" compensation for representational ser$ices rendered in a particular matter efore a department or ("ency of the United States# On Decem er 12' 2000' she !as sentenced to t!o years pro ation and a @1'000 fine#


7A Employee &akes Improper Business %eferrals
( decedent affairs cler+ at a ,eterans (ffairs 4,(6 hospital acted as an a"ent of another employee at the ,( hospital' !ho moonli"hted at a near y funeral home# The cler+ referred ,( officials to the funeral home !here his co!or+er moonli"hted for the handlin" of odies a andoned at the ,( hospital# The moonli"htin" employee paid the cler+ for referrals# )ayments totaled appro%imately @:90# The cler+ pled "uilty on Octo er 13' 1888' to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2034a6416' for recei$in" compensation for representational ser$ices rendered in a particular matter efore a department or ("ency of the United States# On /arch 10' 2000' the moonli"htin" employee !as sentenced to pay @29#

Con'ressional Staffer Accepts Cash in %eturn for Assistance ,ith INS
( Con"ressional staff assistant for a mem er of Con"ress !as assistin" a constituent !ith filin" an application to normali;e the immi"ration status of the constituentDs dau"hter# <hile doin" so' he solicited and recei$ed money from the constituent in e%chan"e for the preparation and filin" of the application !ith the 2mmi"ration and Katurali;ation Ser$ice# Be !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2034a64164-6# On (u"ust 5' 188E' he pled "uilty and on &e ruary 9' 1888' he !as sentenced to three yearsD pro ation' 100 hours of community ser$ice' a @2'3:0 fine and @5E0 in restitution# Under this criminal statute' in "eneral' &ederal employees may not accept compensation for representin" someone else efore a &ederal a"ency on particular matters in !hich the United States is a party#

I%S Employees Take Bribes To I'nore TaD DelinHuency
T!o employees of the 2nternal Ae$enue Ser$ice 42AS6 and the t!o o!ners of a car rental usiness en"a"ed in a scheme in !hich they conspired to improperly handle the company’s delin.uent ta% de t# The company !as e%periencin" serious financial pro lems and had su stantial &ederal employment ta% delin.uencies# The co0o!ners of the company met !ith an 2AS employee !ho introduced them to another 2AS employee# 2AS employee num er 2 told the co0o!ners ho! they could "et their ta% case transferred from the 2AS office !here it !as pendin" to the 2AS office !here he !as employed# (t 33

that point' he !ould permit the company to remain in usiness and pay a minimal amount of its ta% deficiency# The co0o!ners a"reed to a payment of @1'000 per month for this ser$ice# Durin" this time period' the co0o!ners pro$ided oth 2AS employees !ith free rental cars and paid $acations to &lorida# 2AS employee num er 2 also in$ested money and ac.uired an interest in the company# 2n a separate scheme' 2AS employee num er 2 si"ned a one0year contract !ith a local le$ee oard to perform an economic study# The contract called for the 2AS employee to e paid @E9 per hourH he recei$ed appro%imately @3E'000 o$er the follo!in" year# (t the same time' the le$ee oard had ta% disputes pendin" under the employee’s super$ision at the 2AS# Be did not disclose this fact to his super$isors at the 2AS# The rental car company o!ners each pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 203' offerin" compensation to a Go$ernment employee for representational ser$ices rendered in a particular matter efore a department or ("ency of the United States# O!ner num er 1 recei$ed one year pro ation and a @290 fine# O!ner num er 2 !as sentenced to fi$e years pro ation and @80'181 restitution# 2AS employee num er 1 pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2014 64164(6 4 ri ery6 and !as sentenced to fi$e years pro ation and a @3'000 fine# 2AS employee num er 2 pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E4a6' ta+in" official action in matters affectin" a personal financial interest' as !ell as 1E U#S#C# 2014 6426 4 ri ery6H he !as sentenced to t!el$e months in *ail' three years super$ised release' and a @3'000 fine#

Con'ressional Staff &ember Takes Payment to )elp /!rease the Skids2
( Con"ressional staff mem er solicited @790 from a citi;en !ho !as see+in" relief from the stateDs Office of <or+manDs Compensation# Be told the citi;en that the @790 !ould help F"rease the s+idsF in "ettin" her claim appro$ed# The staff mem er specifically re.uested that the money e pro$ided in cash and arran"ed for it to e deli$ered outside of the Con"ress!oman’s office !here he !or+ed# The citi;en later reported the matter to the &-2 !ho introduced an underco$er &-2 a"ent !ho purported to ha$e a !or+erDs compensation claim# 2n tape0recorded con$ersations !ith the under0co$er a"ent' the staffer solicited @790 from the a"ent# The pay0off !as $ideotaped# <hen inter$ie!ed se$eral days later' he initially stated he ne$er accepted money from a 3:

constituent# <hen sho!n a photo of the &-2 a"ent' he stated that he had een offered money y her ut had turned her do!n# <hen told that the person in the photo !as an &-2 a"ent' the staffer statedG F2 "uess 2Dm in a lot of trou le' arenDt 2OF Be !as char"ed !ith $iolations of 1E U#S#C# 201 and 203 and pled "uilty to one count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 203# Be recei$ed a sentence of pro ation and community ser$ice' and !as ordered to pay restitution#

D*T Employee Sentenced for #9 .(S(C( $;K 7iolation
( former US Department of Transportation employee !as sentenced in US District Court for recei$in" unauthori;ed compensation from a Go$ernment contractor for representin" the contractor on a contract id to the Go$ernment# The former official admitted that he assisted a DOT contractor in the preparation of a id pac+a"e for a @1 million Go$ernment contract# The *ud"e sentenced the former employee to a year of pro ation and to pay a @2'900 fine#

Department of -abor Associate Deputy .nder Secretary 7iolates #9 .(S(C( $;K
The (ssociate Deputy Under Secretary for 2nternational Ja or (ffairs at the Department of Ja or !as in$ol$ed in an effort to promote lo!0income housin" su sidi;ed y the /e%ican Go$ernment for lo!0paid /e%ican !or+ers li$in" alon" certain sections of the United States0/e%ican order# Be !as assi"ned the duty of pursuin" arran"ements for a lo!0cost housin" pro*ect in 1881# The pro*ect !as to e financed !ith pri$ate funds# Be riefed the Deputy Under Secretary for 2nternational Ja or (ffairs on the pro"ress of the pro*ect# Durin" Ko$em er 1881' he met !ith United States officials in /e%ico City to discuss' amon" other thin"s' pri$ate sector initiati$es to construct lo!0cost housin" alon" the United States0/e%ican order# Be met in <ashin"ton' D#C# and in /e%ico City and other places !ith se$eral real estate de$elopers interested in lo!0cost housin" alon" the order# Be and the real estate de$elopers met !ith /e%ican an+in" and housin" officials concernin" the lo!0cost housin" and the possi ility that the pro*ect !ould e financed throu"h a /e%ican lo!0income financin" authority# (fter se$eral meetin"s' he told the real estate de$elopers and the /e%ican housin" officials that he !ould not e a le to participate in the *oint $enture that the real 39

estate e%ecuti$es !ere formin" due to his status as a Go$ernment employee# On July 22' 1882' the Under Secretary accepted the offer to !or+ for the *oint $enture in dealin"s !ith the United States# Be !as offered 10 percent of the net profits "enerated y the pro*ect# The pro*ect in$ol$ed the uildin" of 7'000 condominiums and !ould "enerate a out @10'000'000 in net profits# The anticipated total cost of the pro*ect !as in e%cess of @120'000'000# The Under Secretary had an intermediary act on his ehalf in si"nin" a memorandum of a"reement !ith the real estate de$elopers# The Under Secretary' throu"hout the period in .uestion' re.uested tra$el authori;ations and su mitted tra$el $ouchers to the Go$ernment for tra$el to /e%ico to !or+ on the /e%ican !or+er housin" pro*ect# The Go$ernment char"ed that he a"reed to accept compensation for representational ser$ices efore the United States in relation to a particular matter' the housin" pro*ect' in !hich the United States Department of Ja or had a direct and su stantial interest in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2034a6 and 2174a6426# The Go$ernment also claimed that the Under Secretary !as actin" as part of a conspiracy a"ainst the United States in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 351# The Under Secretary pled "uilty to the char"es and !as sentenced to pro ation for 9 years#

Immi'ration Consultant *ffered Payment to INS Employee
(n Fimmi"ration consultantF !ho assisted resident aliens !ith the process of o tainin" 2KS tra$el papers offered compensation to an 2KS officer to speed up the application process# Be pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2034a6426 on January 25' 1883' and !as sentenced to one year pro ation' 7 monthsD home detention' and a @29 special assessment# The defendant !as also prohi ited from !or+in" in the immi"ration consultin" usiness#

Ser'eant"at"Arms of the .nited States Senate Takes Free Fli'ht to )a,aii After %ecommendin' Contractor
The Ser"eant0at0(rms is the chief purchasin" a"ent for the Senate and in that capacity he recommended that the Senate purchase and install a @218'000 (TQT


telephone system for the U#S# Capitol )olice# Three !ee+s later' he accepted a round0trip <ashin"ton0Bonolulu airline tic+et' $alued at @2'500' from an (TQT employee# Be pled "uilty on Ko$em er 1E' 1882' to one misdemeanor count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 203 and !as sentenced to one year of super$ised pro ation' to pay full restitution of @2'500' and a @9'000 ci$il fine#

Citi=en !i es Ille'al Payoffs to I%S Employee
The defendant !as audited y the 2nternal Ae$enue Ser$ice for e%cess deposits of income# Be offered the 2AS a"ent conductin" the audit furniture' e.uipment' and cash if the a"ent !ould help him !ith his ta% pro lems# The a"ent reported his offer to 2AS internal security# Su se.uent discussions et!een the citi;en and the 2AS a"ent' accompanied y payments of @2:0 and @200 in cash to the 2AS a"ent' !ere monitored y 2AS internal security# The citi;en pled "uilty to a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 203' for compensatin" a Go$ernment employee for representational ser$ices !ith respect to a particular matter in !hich the United States had a su stantial interest# The defendant !as "i$en a sentence of pro ation#

Con'ressional Staff &ember Pleads !uilty to #9 .(S(C( $;K 7iolation
The defendant !as a staff assistant to a U#S# Con"ressman in a district office in Geor"ia !hose responsi ilities included handlin" constituent re.uests# The staffer demanded and recei$ed a payment of @300 from a usinessman !ho !as see+in" a &ederal "rant to help him start up a usiness# The staffer also demanded a percenta"e of any "rant money a!arded to the usinessman# Be told the constituent that he !ould ha$e to !or+ ni"hts and !ee+ends on his o!n time to help the constituent and that the money !as to compensate him for the !or+# The staffer !as indicted for personally see+in" payment for official acts in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2014c6 and for demandin" compensation for representational ser$ices efore the United States in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 203# Be pled "uilty to the M 203 $iolation and recei$ed a sentence of pro ation#


And the A,ard !oes to>*ur Sponsor6
The Director of the Kational Cancer 2nstitute at the Kational 2nstitutes of Bealth accepted a cash a!ard from a "rant recipient hospital# The doctor recused himself for a period of four !ee+s around the date of the a!ard presentation from any dealin"s !ith the a!ardin" hospital and noted the receipt of the a!ard on his financial disclosure paper!or+# Of course' this still lea$es the .uestion of !hether the doctor !as permitted y statute to accept "ifts from the donor or"ani;ation 1 !hich fell under the prohi ited sources classification for purposes of the "ift an ecause of the doctor’s potential influence o$er the selection of "rant recipients# Con"ress has re.uested documentation on all K2B a!ard recipients so stay tuned#

Conflicts of Interest 8#9 .(S(C( : $;9"Type 7iolations<
Documentin' &isconduct
Jeffrey Da$is' a former employee of the Kational (rchi$es and Aecords (dministration 4K(A(6' faces a hefty penalty for en"a"in" in a felony conflict of interest# /r# Da$is ser$ed as an (rchi$es Technician at K(A(' a position in !hich he assisted the pu lic !ith re.uests for court documents maintained y K(A(# Be also o!ned and operated a company that char"ed its customers a fee for o tainin" court records in addition to the fees char"ed y K(A(# &rom Septem er 2005 to Octo er 200E' Da$is used his official position at K(A( to retrie$e court documents for his company’s customers# Be also did not pay K(A( the applica le fees associated !ith the company’s customer re.uests for court records in order to conceal from K(A( his affiliation !ith his company and to increase his company’s profits# Da$is pled "uilty to recei$in" payments from his company in connection !ith the retrie$al of court records from K(A( usin" his official position# Be admitted such payments !ere an ille"al supplementation of the salary paid y the "o$ernment as compensation for his ser$ices as a K(A( employee# Da$is’ sentencin" is pendin"' ut he faces the possi ility of fi$e years in prison and a @290'000 fine# 2t loo+s li+e his court records usiness has left him !ith a court record of his o!n#


*ne )appy Family Spends Time To'ether in 5ail
( former pro"rams director for the General Ser$ices (dministration admitted to usin" his position at &ort /onmouth to a!ard payments from the "o$ernment to himself and his family# The former employee did this y a!ardin" pro*ects to t!o contractors !ho in turn hired the employee’s personal usiness enterprise and his dau"hter as su contractors# O$er the course of three years' they recei$ed o$er @E00'000 in fees from the "o$ernmentH the only catch' neither the employee’s personal usiness nor his dau"hter actually performed any ser$ices for the "o$ernment at all# (side from the o $ious fraud to !hich the former employee' his !ife' and his dau"hter pled "uilty' federal la! also prohi its federal employees from ma+in" decisions concernin" matters in !hich they or their family mem ers ha$e a personal financial interest# =$en if the former GS( employee and his dau"hter had actually rendered the ser$ices that they illed for' the former employee !ould still ha$e een in $iolation of federal la! y a!ardin" the pro*ects to the contractors in the first place ecause his o!n financial interests !ere in$ol$ed# The former GS( employee and his family !ere ordered to pay o$er @E00'000 in restitution' and they each recei$ed prison sentences ran"in" from 12 to :7 months#

&oonli'htin' for Contractor %esults in Employee Termination
( contract mana"er at a Tennessee ,alley (uthority 4T,(6 po!er plant in Ientuc+y found himself out t!o *o s after in$esti"ators learned that he had een moonli"htin" for the same contractor he !as o$erseein"# (s part of his responsi ilities !ith T,(' the contract mana"er re$ie!ed contractor ids and o$ersa! contract performance# The mana"er accepted a *o !ith one of T,(’s contractors as a part0time super$isor' and !or+ed for the contractor in O+lahoma and 2ndiana on his days off and $acation days# =$en thou"h the mana"er’s actions did not result in any identified financial loss' he !as terminated from T,( and prosecuted for a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E# Be pled "uilty and !as sentenced to pro ation and a @1'000 fine# This criminal statute prohi its personnel from participatin" in official actions 4such as re$ie!in" contractor ids6 that affect their employer' e$en if they !or+ for that employer only part time# 38

A,ardin' Contracts to Friend Earns Employee Fi e 0ears Probation
2n$esti"ators .uic+ly short0circuited the plans of a K(S( employee to cash in on an a"ency electrical ser$ices contract# The employee !or+ed as a communications specialist at Jan"ley Aesearch Center 4JaAS6' and !as responsi le for re$ie!in" and appro$in" !or+ done on a pro*ect to install ne! >telecommunications closets? in JaAS# The employee recommended that the main pro*ect contactor hire a certain su contractor' !hich coincidentally !as !holly o!ned and operated y the employee’s friend# The prime contractor a"reed# The su contractor completed the !or+' and su se.uently id on another su contract# Upon recei$in" this second contract' the su contractor co$ertly hired another company to complete the !or+H this company !as !holly o!ned and operated y the K(S( employee himself# (t this point' tipsters notified in$esti"ators' !ho found that the scam had netted the pair o$er @:0'000# The employee pled "uilty to $iolatin" the conflict of interest statute' and !as sentenced to fi$e years of pro ation and a @9'000 fine# This conflict of interest statute prohi its personnel from participatin" in official actions 4includin" merely ma+in" a recommendation6 that affect their financial interests#

A,ardin' Contracts to Spouse Earns Couple *ne 0ear in Prison
( former Department of the Treasury employee and her hus and !ere sentenced to a year in prison for a scheme to funnel contracts to companies they personally controlled# The employee' !ho ser$ed as an =mployee De$elopment Specialist' !as responsi le for determinin" the trainin" needs of Treasury employees and procurin" pri$ate trainin" ser$ices# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered that o$er the course of t!o years' the employee had a!arded 109 trainin" contracts $alued at more than @138'700 to companies o!ned y her hus and# The employee pled "uilty to se$eral char"es' includin" $iolations of 1E U#S#C# 20E' participatin" personally and su stantially in matters in !hich she or her spouse had a financial interest# She !as sentenced to a year of prison and three years super$ised release' and !as ordered to pay @9:'900 in restitution# Ber hus and also pled "uilty to se$eral char"es' includin" !ire fraud and conspiracy' and recei$ed the same sentence as his !ife#


A,ardin' Contracts to Spouse II
( contractin" officer for the General Ser$ices (dministration 4GS(6 !ound up in &ederal court after funnelin" contracts to her hus and’s employer# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered that the officer had directed o$er @11#9 million to the company that employed her hus and o$er the span of 19 months' all in the form of GS( purchases of food preparation and ser$in" e.uipment items# (s a result of these purchases' the officer’s hus and recei$ed raises and a Ja"uar from his employer# The officer pled "uilty to $iolatin" conflict of interest la!s' and !as sentenced to 1E0 days of home confinement and fi$e years of pro ation# She additionally !as ordered to pay @171'000 in restitution#

A,ardin' Contracts to Spouse III
The head of the Ja! =nforcement Coordinatin" Committee )ro"ram at the U#S# (ttorney’s Office for the /iddle District of Jouisiana disco$ered he had done his *o too !ell !hen he !as arrested and prosecuted for $iolatin" conflict of interest la!s# (uthorities learned that the employee' !ho !as responsi le for arran"in" trainin" seminars that !ould foster cooperation !ith state and local la! enforcement' had funneled seminar contracts to a certain companyH this company then su contracted to a company o!ned y the employee’s !ife# This scheme had funneled @99'000 to the employee’s !ife' and the company had +ic+ed ac+ @20'000 directly to the employee himself# The employee pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E' participatin" personally and su stantially in a matter in !hich he or his spouse had a financial interest' and !as sentenced to three years of pro ation' 200 hours of community ser$ice' and a @9'000 fine#

And the Band Played *n>@hile the Ship Sank Around Them
(n (ssistant Secretary of Telecommunications and 2nformation !ithin the Department of Commerce spo+e !ith ethics officers a out a small dinner party she !as ha$in" at her home ut ne"lected to mentionG a6 the party !as for et!een 70 and E0 people and 6 it !as paid for y companies she !as responsi le for re"ulatin"# (lthou"h


the ethics officers found her to e in $iolation of the department’s re"ulations' the Justice Department elected not to press criminal char"es#

@atch Promotin' 0our Business on !o ernment Time6
The FactsE ( Senior (d$isor to the State Department had an interest in a usiness that planned to de$elop a theme par+ in the /iddle =ast# Ko pro lem there# -ut the (d$isor' in his official position' recommended to other State Department officials that the State Department support the enterprise# That $iolated the la!# (fter a "uilty plea' he !as sentenced to a year of pro ation and ordered to perform 29 hours community ser$ice and to pay a @20'000 fine# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' Dec# 2000#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 20E 420036 for ids any employee of the e%ecuti$e ranch of the &ederal Go$ernment from recommendin" in his or her official position any matter in !hich he or she has a financial interest# The penalty for $iolatin" this la! could e a fine' a prison sentence for up to one year' or othCunless the $iolation is found to e >!illful'? in !hich case the ma%imum prison sentence increases to 9 years 4see 1E U#S#C# M 217 4200366#

)elpin' to Contract ,ith a Potential Employer F A Bad Idea
The FactsE ( U#S# State Department official !as ne"otiatin" an employment contract !ith a pri$ate employer !hen he recommended in his official capacity that the Department of Defense 4DoD6 enter into a contract !ith the same company# The aim of the contractG to pro$ide e.uipment and transportation to help reco$er the remains of U#S# ser$icemen !ho !ere missin" in action durin" the Iorean <ar# Aelyin" upon the official’s recommendation' DoD contracted !ith that company for @515'000# Unfortunately' the official’s recommendation to contract !ith a company !ith !hom he !as ne"otiatin" employment $iolated the la!# On January 10' 2002' the State Department official !as sentenced to three years’ pro ation and ordered to pay a @9'000 fine# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' &e # 2002#6 The -a,E <ith some e%ceptions' 1E U#S#C# M 20E 420036 for ids any officer or employee of the e%ecuti$e ranch from participatin" >personally and su stantially? in his or her official capacity in a contract' contro$ersy' >or other particular matter? in !hich he or she' or any person or or"ani;ation !ith !hom he is she is ne"otiatin" employment' has :2

a financial interest# (nyone $iolatin" this la! >shall e imprisoned for not more than one year'? fined' or oth 4see 1E U#S#C# M 2176# -y ma+in" a recommendation on a contract in$ol$in" a company !ith !hich he !as ne"otiatin" employment' the official in this case $iolated the la!#

5ud'e Imposes Steep Prison Sentence in Conflict of Interest Case
( former employee of the District of Colum ia Go$ernment !as sentenced in the U#S# District Court for the District of Colum ia for o$erseein" contracts in$ol$in" an indi$idual !ith !hom he !as financially in$ol$ed# The former employee ser$ed as chief of the day pro"rams ranch of the D#C# /ental Aetardation and De$elopmental Disa ilities (dministration# This (dministration placed mentally retarded adults in non0 residential day pro"rams# The former employee super$ised the assi"nment of mentally retarded adults to day pro"rams and administered the rules "o$ernin" these pro"rams# Durin" this time' the former employee assisted a !oman in startin" up a day treatment pro"ram for mentally retarded adults# The former employee made loans to the !oman and referred clients to her# Thus' the former employee had a financial relationship !ith the !oman# The former employee !as no lon"er impartial since he had a financial interest in seein" her succeed so his loan could e paid ac+# 2n addition' as part of his D#C# Go$ernment duties' he o$ersa! the super$ision of her company# <hen she !ould pay ac+ a portion of the loan' she !ould also pay him additional monies# The *ury found the former employee "uilty of conspiracy and of $iolation of the conflict0of0interest la!# )articularly ecause of the in$ol$ement of a $ulnera le $ictim 4the mentally retarded indi$iduals in the day pro"ram6' the *ud"e sentenced the former employee to :7 months in prison' follo!ed y 3 years of super$ised release to include 100 hours of community ser$ice# The *ud"e also ordered the former employee to pay a @29'000 fine# &ederal conflict of interest statutes prohi it employees from ta+in" official action in particular matters in !hich they ha$e a financial interest#


Federal Employee Con icted of Conflict of Interest 7iolation @hile Searchin' for Ne, 5ob
Jo 0huntin" efforts y a former Commerce Department 2nspector General 42G6 turned up a &ederal con$iction for a conflict of interest instead of a *o # (s part of the former 2GDs official duties' he re$ie!ed the performance of a certain company' !hich had contracted !ith the Commerce Department to update automated !eather forecastin" systems# (t the same time that he !as performin" these o$ersi"ht duties' the former official e"an ne"otiatin" employment !ith the same company# ( &ederal criminal statute' 1E U#S#C# 20E' prohi its &ederal employees from officially !or+in" on particular matters that ha$e a direct and predicta le effect on an or"ani;ation !ith !hich they are ne"otiatin" prospecti$e employment# The former 2GDs re$ie! of the companyDs performance on the Commerce Department contract $iolated this statute# This is the same statute that ars &ederal employees from ta+in" official action on matters that affect their o!n financial interests or those of their spouses or children#

CIA Conflict of Interest
( C2( employee paid @:E'000 to settle a complaint rou"ht y the Department of Justice that the employee had participated in official matters in !hich his spouse had a financial interest# The employee had ser$ed as the Contractin" Officer Technical Aepresentati$e 4COTA6 on certain contracts et!een his a"ency and a pri$ate corporation' !here his !ife !or+ed# The contracts in$ol$ed millions of dollars a!arded to the corporation# (lthou"h the employeeDs !ife did not !or+ on the same contracts as the employee' she recei$ed stoc+ options for the purchase of the corporation’s stoc+ that !ere affected y the corporationDs profits from the contracts her hus and had !or+ed on# ( criminal statute' 1E U#S#C# 20E' prohi its employees from participatin" personally and su stantially in matters that ha$e a direct and predicta le effect on their o!n financial interests or those of their spouses' minor children' or or"ani;ations in !hich they are employed# 2n this case' the employeeDs in$ol$ement in the corporation’s contracts affected the profita ility of the corporation' !hich !as passed on to the employeeDs !ife throu"h her stoc+ options#


Former Postmaster !eneral Pays Settlement to End Conflict of Interest In esti'ation
( former )ostmaster General of the United States a"reed to pay a @25'990 settlement to end a complaint rou"ht y the Department of Justice pertainin" to a conflict of interest in$ol$in" the official’s holdin"s in a soft drin+ company# The complaint arose !hile the )ostal Ser$ice !as e%plorin" a potential strate"ic alliance et!een the )ostal Ser$ice and the soft drin+ company# The )ostal Ser$ice -oard of Go$ernors had the authority to appro$e the strate"ic alliance' and the )ostmaster GeneralDs role !as to ad$ise the -oard of Go$ernors !ith re"ard to their consideration of strate"ic alliances# The )ostmaster General rendered ad$ice to the -oard e$en thou"h he o!ned shares of stoc+ in the soft drin+ company and therefore had a personal financial interest in the decision# The )ostmaster General !as char"ed specifically !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E' a criminal statute that prohi its an employee from participatin" personally and su stantially' as a Go$ernment official' in a particular matter in !hich he or she has a financial interest#

)i'h"%ankin' !o ernment *fficial A'rees to Conflict of Interest Settlement
( hi"h0ran+in" Go$ernment official !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E' !hich "o$erns official acts affectin" a personal financial interest# The &ederal employee' an (ssistant to the )resident for Kational Security (ffairs' !as in$esti"ated for holdin" stoc+ in certain petroleum companies !hile ser$in" as the Deputy (ssistant to the )resident for Kational Security (ffairs# The employee !as ad$ised y the Kational Security Council Je"al (d$iser to di$est his shares of his familyDs petroleum and other ener"y0producin" stoc+s to a$oid any conflict of interest# Durin" the time the employee !as told to di$est his stoc+s' he !as in$ol$ed in his official capacity in matters that may ha$e had a direct and predicta le effect on the petroleum company# The official a"reed to pay the Department of the Treasury @23'0:3' !hich represented the increased $alue of the stoc+s' to settle the matter#


D(C( Public -ibrary Director Sentenced for Tra el %eimbursement Scheme
The former director of the District of Colum ia )u lic Ji rary !as con$icted for fraudulent acti$ities in$ol$in" Go$ernment cash ad$ances and reim ursement payments# (t the time' the director !as ser$in" as oth the head of the D#C# )u lic Ji rary and the president of a trade or"ani;ation' the (merican Ji rary (ssociation# The director too+ cash ad$ances from D#C# )u lic Ji rary funds to pay for e%penses incurred in his role as president of the (merican Ji rary (ssociation# Be then as+ed the trade or"ani;ation to reim urse him y sendin" chec+s directly to his home address# 2n this manner' the li rary director deposited o$er @2:'000 into his personal an+ account# Su se.uently' the director failed to reim urse the D#C# )u lic Ji rary account for the cash ad$ances# 2n Septem er 188E' a *ud"e ordered the former director to pay ac+ the @2:'000 o!ed to the D#C# Ji rary' plus an additional @17'E70 o!ed for ac+ &ederal income ta%es# Be !as sentenced to fi$e months of home detention' to e follo!ed y t!o years pro ation for $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E' a conflicts of interest criminal statute#

Former Federal Bureau of In esti'ation 8FBI< A'ent 7iolates Conflict of Interest Statute
( former &-2 a"ent pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E' !hich prohi its &ederal employees from participatin" in official acts in !hich they ha$e a personal financial interest# The a"ent’s *o responsi ilities included researchin" and testin" the use of pepper spray for the &-2' !hich resulted in contact !ith the manufacturers of one particular type of pepper spray# The a"ent su se.uently recommended this pepper spray' and in return' recei$ed @95'900 in payments from the manufacturer# &ollo!in" the a"ent’s recommendation' the &-2 appro$ed the use of the pepper spray for its a"ents' resultin" in a lar"e purchase from the manufacturer# (dditionally' as a result of the &-2 a"entDs research and recommendation' other la! enforcement a"encies nation!ide e"an to use the pepper spray produced y the manufacturer# The former a"ent !as sentenced to t!o months imprisonment follo!ed y three years of super$ised release for his $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E# This statute ars &ederal employees from officially participatin" 4in this case' e$en ma+in" a recommendation6 in particular matters 4in this case' a contract to uy pepper spray6 that ha$e a direct and


predicta le effect on the employee’s financial interests or those of the employee’s spouse or minor children#

Army Employee Sentenced for Conflicts of Interest
( ci$ilian employee of the U#S# (rmy pleaded "uilty to $iolation of the conflicts of interest statute 41E U#S#C# 20E6 in &ederal Court and !as sentenced to one year pro ation and a @1'000 fine# The employee had participated in the a!ardin" and administration of contracts in$ol$in" a company in !hich the employee o!ned stoc+' there y participatin" personally and su stantially as a Go$ernment employee in matters that affected his financial interests# The employee' !ho filed financial disclosure statements 4OG= &orm :906' had also failed to disclose his financial interest in the company#

Chief Financial *fficer and Chief Information *fficer of the .nited States Department of Education 7iolates #9 .(S(C( $;9
<hile the official held the a o$e titles at the Department of =ducation' his !ife o!ned 700 shares of Compa. computer stoc+ that she had inherited from her mother# Durin" this period' the official !as in$ol$ed in his official capacity in issues concernin" Compa. computers# The Go$ernment contended that the official $iolated 1E U#S#C# 20E' for participatin" personally and su stantially as a Go$ernment officer in a particular matter in !hich' to his +no!led"e' he andRor his spouse has a financial interest# )ursuant to a ci$il settlement' the official paid the Go$ernment @20'000' and the Go$ernment released him from its claims#

Chief of Staff at the Department of 7eterans Affairs &edical Center in Jansas City4 En'a'es in Conflict of Interest
Durin" the same time the Chief of Staff !as employed y the Department of ,eterans (ffairs /edical Center' he !as also employed as a physician y the Uni$ersity of Iansas /edical Center in Iansas City' Iansas# Su se.uently' the Chief of Staff in his official capacity appro$ed a contract for cardiocath ser$ices to the Department of ,eterans (ffairs /edical Center y the Uni$ersity of Iansas /edical Center#


On /arch E' 2000' the Chief of Staff pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E' !hich ars employees from ta+in" official action in matters affectin" their personal financial interests# On (u"ust 5' 2000' he !as sentenced to pay a @290 fine and a special assessment of @29#

Internal %e enue Ser ice 8I%S< %e enueLSettlement *fficer Prosecuted .P #9 .(S(C( $;9
(n 2AS employee !as assi"ned to a certain 2AS collection matter' !hich "a$e him inside information concernin" a proposed stoc+ e%chan"e# (fter his role in the case !as su stantially o$er' the employee purchased appro%imately @2'000 in the stoc+ su *ect to the proposed e%chan"e ased in part on information he had learned durin" the course of his duties as a Ae$enue Officer# (fter the stoc+ purchase' the 2AS employee had on se$eral occasions' minor contact !ith the parties efore the 2AS# Be e$entually !ent to his super$isor' disclosed his interest in the stoc+' and !as remo$ed from further participation in the case# The 2AS employee lost money on the stoc+ transaction# The 2AS employee !as prosecuted pursuant to 1E U#S#C# 20E for participatin" personally and su stantially as a Go$ernment officer or employee in a particular matter in !hich' to his +no!led"e' he had a financial interest' and 1E U#S#C# 2174a6416# The employee !as placed on pretrial di$ersion for si% months on the condition that he resi"n from the 2AS and perform 120 hours of community ser$ice#

District Conser ationist at Department of A'riculture+s National %esources Conser ation Ser ice Sentenced for Conflict of Interest
The KACS employee !as the Go$ernmentDs technical representati$e on a USD( soil and !ater conser$ation pro"ram that !as implemented throu"h a State of Korth Carolina pro"ram called KC(CS) 4Korth Carolina ("ricultural Cost Share )ro"ram6# Under the KC(CS) pro"ram' local lando!ners can recei$e fundin" to reduce a"ricultural pollution# The KACS employee' in his position as a district conser$ationist' appro$ed a contract !here y a usiness $enture o!ned y his spouse sold filter fa ric to lando!ners throu"h the KC(CS) pro"ram# The KACS employee !as char"ed !ith a felony count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2' aidin" and a ettin"' and 1E U#S#C# 20E' for participatin" personally and su stantially as a


Go$ernment employee in a particular matter' in !hich' to his +no!led"e' his spouse has a financial interest# &urther' in his position as a district conser$ationist' he appro$ed a contract et!een the KC(CS) and a cattle operation in !hich he and his spouse !ere partners# (dditionally' he appro$ed a contract for fence construction et!een the KC(CS) and a third party# This contract resulted in payments that !ere transferred to a partnership consistin" of the KACS employee' his spouse' and the third party# The KACS employee !as char"ed !ith t!o additional felony counts of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E' for participatin" personally and su stantially as a Go$ernment employee in a particular matter' in !hich' to his +no!led"e' he' his spouse' and "eneral partner ha$e a financial interest# ( *ury con$icted the KACS employee on all counts# Be !as sentenced y the court to one year of pro ation#

A Contractin' *fficer for the Department of the Army at Fort 5ackson4 South Carolina Settles Conflict of Interest Alle'ation
Sometime prior to Ko$em er 1889' the contractin" officer e"an a relationship !ith a foreman for a Go$ernment contractor# The foreman su se.uently started his o!n company and e"an iddin" on Go$ernment contracts at &ort Jac+son# 2n Ko$em er 1889' the former Go$ernment contractin" officer assumed the title of pro*ect mana"er at the ne! company and performed $arious duties for the former foreman !ithout monetary compensation# On (pril 8' 1887' the contractin" officer appro$ed and certified for payment an in$oice su mitted y the company# She continued her employment relationship !ith the company until June 1887# Bo!e$er' she su mitted a !ritten statement to the Director of Contractin" at &ort Jac+son attestin" that her association !ith the company ended in /arch 1887# The former contractin" officer !as indicted on Decem er 3' 1885 for $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E' ta+in" official action in matters affectin" an employee’s personal financial interest# She si"ned a )retrial Di$ersion ("reement !hich re.uires that she complete 90 hours of community ser$ice#


Assistant .nited States Attorney 8A.SA< Con icted on Conflict of Interest and Fraud
The (US( for the Central District of California !as indicted after it !as disco$ered that on numerous occasions he had made fa$ora le recommendations to the court' the pro ation office' and other prosecutin" offices on ehalf of cooperatin" !itnesses and defendants in e%chan"e for hundreds of thousands of dollars# The (US( had' for e%ample' accepted @8E'000 from one cooperatin" !itness !ho had pre$iously een con$icted in the Korthern District of Te%as and on !hose ehalf the (US( had ar"ued for leniency at the sentencin" hearin"# 2n addition' he had used his official position to secure entry into the United States of se$eral forei"n nationals !hom he elie$ed !ould ma+e su stantial in$estments in a company in !hich he and his !ife had a controllin" financial interest# Once the forei"n nationals entered the United States' t!o 2ranian companies !ith !hich they !ere affiliated loaned a total of @E70'000 to the (US(’s company# The (US( pled "uilty to one felony conflict of interest count' 1E U#S#C# 20E' and t!o counts of !ire fraud' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 13:3 and 13:7# Be !as fined @5'900 and sentenced to t!o years in prison plus three years of super$ised release#

Patrick Air Force Base En'ineer 7iolates Conflict of Interest Statute
(n en"ineer in the Contracts Department at )atric+ (ir &orce -ase started a usiness' alon" !ith former military personnel and former Go$ernment employees' !hich su mitted a id to the ase# The en"ineer' in his official capacity' pro$ided the technical e$aluations on the id# Throu"h the iddin" process' the company !as a!arded the contract# The en"ineer !as char"ed !ith participatin" personally and su stantially in a particular matter in !hich he had a financial interest' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E# )ursuant to 1E U#S#C# 2174a6416' he pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of section 20E and !as sentenced to nine months’ pro ation and fined @2'900#


Federal A iation Administration 8FAA< Employee !uilty of 7iolatin' #9 .(S(C( $;9
The &(( employee re$ie!ed the applications of aircraft component manufacturers# Be !as the &(( representati$e on a fli"ht test of a Ground )ro%imity <arnin" System 4G)<S6 manufactured y a certain corporation# 2n the course of his duties for the &((' the employee o tained access to proprietary information su mitted to the &(( y the G)<S manufacturer# (t the same time' the &(( employee !as de$elopin" and mar+etin" his o!n G)<S for sale to the pu lic# The &(( employee !as char"ed !ith a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E due to the fact that he participated personally and su stantially in the &((Ds test fli"ht of a G)<S !hile de$elopin" his o!n G)<SH he pled "uilty and !as sentenced to three years pro ation#

CIA Employee 7iolates Conflict of Interest Statute
( Central 2ntelli"ence ("ency Contractin" Officer’s Technical Aepresentati$e 4COTA6 pled "uilty to a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E after in$esti"ators disco$ered that he had used his Go$ernment position to secure employment for a friend !ho o!ed him money# The employee’s duties as a COTA included the technical super$ision of t!o Go$ernment contracts !ith a particular company throu"h !hich the Go$ernment funded a classified pro"ram# The employee used his position as a COTA to cause the company to hire one of his friends as a consultant to the pro"ram# The friend o!ed a su stantial sum of money to the employee and his !ife and did not ha$e the financial means to repay them# (t no time did the employee disclose to the Go$ernment or the company that the friend o!ed him or his !ife money# The Go$ernment char"ed that' under these circumstances' the COTA had a financial interest in the companyDs decision to enter into a consultin" a"reement !ith the friend and that he $iolated 1E U#S#C# 20E y participatin" in that decision# The COTA pled "uilty to a felony $iolation of section 20E# Be also pled "uilty to a char"e of possession of child porno"raphy o tained throu"h unauthori;ed personal use of a Go$ernment0furnished computer# Be recei$ed three years super$ised release and !as ordered to pay a @:'000 fine#


Computer"Aided Na i'ation -ea es %etired Captain -ost at Sea
( Coast Guard Captain !or+in" on the inte"ration of le"acy na$i"ation systems !ith G)S spo+e !ith a "o$ernment contractor assi"ned to the pro*ect a out post0 retirement !or+# Once retired' the captain made recommendations concernin" purchases to his former collea"ues still !earin" Coast Guard uniforms 1 purchases that directly enefited the captain in his ne! role as consultant# The "o$ernment maintained that the captain $iolated 1E U#S#C# M 20E4a6' y ne"otiatin" for future employment !ith a contractor he dealt !ith in his acti$e duty capacity' and 1E U#S#C# M 205 4a6416' y attemptin" to influence "o$ernment personnel on a pro*ect o$er !hich he had e%ercised considera le responsi ility# The Go$ernment settled !ith the captain for @29'000#

Conflict of Interest %esults in C#;4;;; Fine
( Ka$y Construction Aepresentati$e o$erseein" a company’s t!o construction contracts !ith the Ka$y secured employment to su contract the same pro*ects he !as supposedly inspectin"' splittin" the proceeds !ith an e.ually unscrupulous employee of the company# Be pled "uilty to one count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# M 20E 4 arrin" an employee from ta+in" official action in matters affectin" certain personal or or"ani;ational financial interests6 and one count of $iolatin" :1 U#S#C# M 93' the (nti0 Iic+ ac+ (ct of 18E7# Bis "et0rich0.uic+ scheme cost him si% years pro ation' si% months home detention' 100 hours of community ser$ice' and a @10'000 fine#

A'ricultural Economist and @ife 7iolate #9 .(S(C( $;9 in 7isa Scam
( Department of ("riculture a"ricultural economist found himself facin" *ail time for his decision to attempt to e%ploit his Go$ernment position# The economist !as put in char"e of a Department pro"ram to rin" to"ether U#S# and Chinese a"riculture e%perts# 2nstead' the economist for"ed documents' !ith the assistance of his !ife' to e%tort @E2'000 from nearly 100 Chinese nationals see+in" entry to the United States# <hile the economist’s case is still pendin"' his !ife pled "uilty to one count of aidin" and a ettin" an unla!ful conflict of interest in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# MM 20E and 2# She recei$ed t!o years pro ation and 100 hours of community ser$ice#


Consultant+s Attempted Bribery !arners C#;;; Fine
( consultant in the office of the District of Colum ia Chief Technolo"y Officer ended up in court after solicitin" +ic+ ac+s from a pri$ate company# The consultant !as tas+ed !ith a!ardin" contracts to information technolo"y companies' and decided to "o ac+ to a company he had recently appro$ed and demand a cut of their profits# Unhappily for him' the company !ent to the authorities instead# The consultant pled "uilty to one count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# M 20E 4a6' ta+in" official action in matters affectin"
an employee’s personal financial interest' and !as sentenced to a year of pro ation and a

@1000 fine#

Attempted Bribery of Immi'ration *fficial Nets a 0ear of Probation
(n applicant for U#S# citi;enship slid @200 in an unmar+ed en$elope across to an (d*udication Officer durin" his inter$ie!' hopin" for a fa$ora le outcome# Be "ot a year’s pro ation instead#

Contractors and Army *fficer Face Fi e 0ears for Conflict of Interest
( raid of an (rmy Colonel’s residence re$ealed e$idence that led to char"es for the officer as !ell as t!o employees of a /aryland military contractor# The officer super$ised solicitation' a!ard' and o$ersi"ht of more than 15'000 military contracts in Iorea# Upon learnin" that the officer !as considerin" retirement' t!o military contractors contacted him re"ardin" his potential employment at the contractors’ company# O$er the course of the ne%t si% months' the officer and the contractors had len"thy discussions re"ardin" the possi le *o offer# The ne"otiations in$ol$ed a trip to company head.uarters as !ell as at least se$en dinners at e%pensi$e restaurants' all paid for y the company# Durin" this time period' the officer did not recuse himself from matters in$ol$in" the company# 2n fact' the officer on one occasion o$erruled the decision of technical e%perts !ho recommended a!ardin" a contract to a different company' and instead recommended the contractors’ company# On another occasion' the officer told another contractor that if he !ished to participate in the pro"ram in the future' he should id as a su contractor to the first contractors’ company# The contractors’ internal emails


ad$ocatin" the officer’s hirin" noted that >ShTis e%pectations are hi"h ut his $alue has een pro$ed#? Tips from a mem er of the officer’s command led to an intera"ency in$esti"ation that unco$ered e"re"ious ri e0ta+in" to the tune of more than @500'000 4much of !hich !as hidden in undles of cash under the officer’s mattress6 in addition to the ille"al ne"otiations !ith the contractors# These ri es had resulted in nearly @29 million in contracts ein" ille"ally re!arded to companies for uildin" facilities and pro$idin" security "uards at military installations in Iorea# The officer pled "uilty to char"es of conspiracy and ri ery' and !as sentenced to 9: months in prison follo!ed y three years of super$ised release# Be !as also assessed a @10'000 fine' !as stripped of ran+' and !ill recei$e no retirement pay# The t!o contractors face fi$e years in prison and a @290'000 fine#

Employee Fined C#K4;;; for Conflict of Interest
( Super$isory (c.uisition /ana"ement Specialist at <ri"ht0)atterson (ir &orce -ase !as indicted for participatin" in employment ne"otiations !ith a company !hile he simultaneously !or+ed on contracts in$ol$in" that company# (s part of the employee’s *o responsi ilities' he pro$ided a idder on a Go$ernment contract !ith ad$ice and recommendations related to the iddin" process# Bo!e$er' at the same time' the employee !as in employment ne"otiations !ith one of the idder’s su contractors' and !as !ell a!are of the su contractor’s interest in the idder’s success# The employee pled "uilty to $iolatin" the conflict of interest statute that prohi its an indi$idual from en"a"in" in employment ne"otiations !ith a company !hile simultaneously participatin" in an official capacity on a Go$ernment contract !ith the company# The employee !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and ordered to pay @12'000 in restitution and a @1'000 fine#

Conflict of Interest Nets Employee CM;; Fine
<hen determinin" !hich company should recei$e a contract to produce a $ideo on P2I issues for the Department of Commerce' a producerRdirector in the Office of )u lic (ffairs settled on a small production company that speciali;ed in $oiceo$er !or+#


There !as only one small pro lemCthe company !as o!ned y the employee and his !ife# The Department of Commerce e$entually paid the company o$er @10'000 for their !or+' earnin" the employee and his !ife a profit of o$er @1000# Unfortunately for the employee' his fifteen minutes of fame !ere cut short y a District Court Jud"e' !ho sentenced him to one year of pro ation' 100 hours of community ser$ice' and a @800 fine# The employee !as found "uilty of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 20E4a6' !hich ars employees from participatin" personally and su stantially in a matter in !hich they ha$e a financial interest#

Employee Fined C#;;; for Conflict of Interest
&unnelin" contracts to friends certainly did not pay off for the Senior De$elopment Officer of the 2nternational -roadcastin" -ureau 42--6# The officer !as responsi le for de$elopin" and securin" fundin" for re$enue0producin" pro*ects for the 2--' an independent a"ency affiliated !ith the State Department# <hen determinin" !hich company should recei$e an @E9'000 "rant to train affiliate radio stations in U"anda' the officer selected a usiness o!ned y his friend# 2n return for this "enerosity' his friend o li"in"ly selected a su contractor near and dear to the officer’s heart 1 a company o!ned and mana"ed y the officer and his !ife# 2n order to fulfill the @19'000 contract' the officer mana"ed to con$ince 2-- to fly him to U"anda !ith "o$ernment funds as part of his >official duties#? Bo!e$er' 2-- soon disco$ered the officer’s relationship !ith the su contractin" company# &or his $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E' !hich for ids employees from participatin" personally and su stantially in a matter in !hich they ha$e a financial interest' the officer earned three years pro ation' 90 hours community ser$ice' a @1000 fine' and !as re.uired to pay o$er @19'000 in restitution#

Conflict of Interest %esults in 5ail Time for AcHuisitions EDecuti e
( former senior (ir &orce official found herself in &ederal prison after her $iolation of conflicts0of0interest statutes# The official en"a"ed in *o ne"otiations !ith a pri$ate company !hile still employed y the (ir &orce as the chief ne"otiator for a @23 illion leasin" plan !ith that company# <hile the official did e$entually recuse herself


from participation in decisions in$ol$in" the company' her recusal came three months after the e"innin" of her ne"otiations# The official e"an ne"otiations !ith the company throu"h encrypted e0mails sent y her dau"hter' !ho !as an employee of the companyH her dau"hter set up a secret meetin" et!een the official and company e%ecuti$es# (t the start of the meetin"' the official informed the e%ecuti$es that she !as still participatin" personally and su stantially on matters in$ol$in" the companyH ho!e$er' oth parties elected to continue the meetin" and to simply +eep it a secret# The ne"otiations continued for se$eral more months' all !hile the official !as still participatin" personally and su stantially in decisions' appro$als' and ad$ice in matters in !hich the company had a financial interest# (fter the official finally su mitted her letter dis.ualifyin" herself from !or+in" on matters in$ol$in" the company' in$esti"ators e"an scrutini;in" the timeline of her story# The official lied repeatedly to in$esti"ators as to the start date of her employment ne"otiations' colla oratin" !ith the company e%ecuti$es to match stories# The former official pled "uilty in &ederal court' and !as sentenced to nine months in prison and se$en months either in a half!ay house or under home detention# The company e%ecuti$e faces a *ail term of no more than si% months under &ederal sentencin" "uidelines# &ederal )rocurement la! specifically for ids a company or its e%ecuti$es from ma+in" any offer or promise of future employment to a &ederal procurement officer# Ji+e!ise' procurement officers are prohi ited from discussin" employment so lon" as they o$ersee matters in$ol$in" that company#

Credit Card Abuse
Sportin' !oods Scam Steals from .ncle Sam
2t seemed li+e the perfect scamG O!ners of a sportin" "oods store near a military installation allo!ed ser$ice0mem ers to char"e personal items on "o$ernment purchase cards 4G)C6# Ser$ice0mem ers !ould o$erchar"e the cards and then split the e%tra cash et!een themsel$es and the store o!ners# One unluc+y =07 !as cau"ht !hen he char"ed


@1890 on a G)C and poc+eted @E90' !hich he used to uy a num er of sportin" "oods# The perfect scam didn’t !or+ out so !ell for the =07# Be !as con$icted in a court martial' reduced to =01' "i$en 1E months confinement' and "i$en a ad conduct dischar"e#

Pin")eads I'nore !o ernment Purchase Card Procedures
The /ana"er of an (rmy -o!lin" )ro Shop recei$ed factory re ates for the o!lin" products he purchased for the shop usin" a Go$ernment credit card# Go$ernment )urchase Card procedures stipulate that cardholders should ta+e ad$anta"e of any re ates offered' !hether cash or merchandise' and that manufacturer and retailer re ates should e made paya le to the appropriate Go$ernment a"ency# The /ana"er purchased property for the shop' a /<A entity' on a Go$ernment contractH therefore' the re ates !ere the property of DoD and should ha$e een turned in to the a"ency’s financial officer# 2nstead' the /ana"er +ept the re ates' !hich !ere in the form of -est -uy "ift cards' for his personal use# Be !as e$en heard ra""in" a out all of the free stuff he !ould e a le to uy# &urthermore' he improperly lent his Go$ernment impact card to another ci$ilian o!lin" facility employee in $iolation of Go$ernment )urchase Card standard operatin" procedure !hich re.uires that only the named indi$idual on the card may use it for official purposes in compliance !ith a"ency accounts# This employee +ept the cash and "ift card re ates he recei$ed from usin" the /ana"er’s cardH failin" to pro$ide them to the /<A finance officer and resultin" in a @230 cost loss for the Go$ernment# These actions constitute larceny and improper use of a Go$ernment purchase card# The /ana"er resi"ned in lieu of further disciplinary action# The employee also resi"ned#

Electronics Scam -ands Sailor in )ot @ater
(n acti$e duty Ka$y sailor and authori;ed Go$ernment purchase card user noticed one day that some of the items she had purchased for her Command !ere missin" from the !arehouse# She decided to "o ahead and repurchase the items to >pre$ent any of her shipmates from "ettin" in trou le for stealin" Go$ernment property#? This incident seemed to "i$e the sailor an idea ecause a out t!o years later she decided to try to use her Go$ernment purchase card to conduct !idespread theft# =$er cautious' she


first conducted a fe! >test runs? y purchasin" items for her personal use on her Go$ernment card# The misuse !ent undetected so the sailor *oined !ith a co0conspirator to discuss e$en i""er plans# They decided to uy laptop computers and plasma tele$isions on the sailor’s Go$ernment card and to re0sell them for personal profit# Ka$y auditors disco$ered the scheme and determined that the sailor and her co0conspirator had defrauded the Go$ernment out of @373'2:3# The sailor had used her Go$ernment card to purchase 172 note oo+ computers' 79 i" screen tele$isions' 22 di"ital cameras' G)S de$ices' camcorders' computer monitors' and home theater systems# Ber efforts to pre$ent her shipmates from "ettin" into trou le and her su se.uent emulation of the local cut0rate electronic retailer led the sailor to plead "uilty to one count of theft of Go$ernment property in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# M7:1# She is scheduled for sentencin" in (u"ust 200E#

Stealin' Isn+t *nly @ay to &isuse a !o ernment Issued Credit Card
( U#S# )ostal Ser$ice employee recei$ed a Go$ernment 2ssued Credit Card 4G2CC6 throu"h Citi an+ to co$er relocation costs# 2n recei$in" the G2CC' the employee si"ned a contract !ith Citi an+ statin" he !ould pay the entire alance of the credit card !ithin 29 days of the billing statement closing date.
The employee accrued a balance of over $6, He also agreed with the U.S.P.S. to pay the balance on time regardless of whether or not he had received reimbursement. on the account, but did not ma!e an initial payment on the balance until four months after the due date, and did not pay off the entire balance until " months after the due date. The employee procrastinated in re#uesting reimbursement and then he waited si$ wee!s before depositing the reimbursement chec! and ma!ing a payment toward the balance on the credit card. The employee also retained a portion of the reimbursement funds for himself, leaving a balance on the card for si$ more months. %itiban! canceled the card and the employee was fired for failing to pay off the &'%% on time and misusing government funds.

.se of Fello, Soldiers+ !o ernment Credit Cards Earns %eprimand
<hile conductin" operations in Iu!ait' an (rmy /a*or in the Corps Support Group (d$ance )arty needed a num er of mission0essential items# Be ordered these items !ith se$eral Go$ernment )urchase Cards 4G)Cs6# The only pro lem' the cards !ere not his# -efore deployment' the /a*or had mana"ed to collect a list of the num ers


and security codes of G)Cs held y mem ers of his unit !ho !ere not deployin"# These cardholders then noticed a rash of une%plained payments from Iu!ait# (s cardholders are personally responsi le for the char"es on their cards' se$eral cardholders disputed the char"es in accordance !ith re"ulations# This led to a lon" series of unnecessary and frustratin" e%chan"es !ith the credit card company# (s a result of his actions' the /a*or recei$ed counselin"# <hile there !as no e$idence that he had used the cards for personal purchases' his use !as unauthori;ed# G)Cs can only e used y their authori;ed cardholder !ith the consent of an (ppro$in" Official# Unauthori;ed use ypasses the safe"uards created to minimi;e a use#

Credit Card Abuse and &isuse of %esources %esults in Suspension
(n 2T Specialist !ith the Defense 2nformation Systems ("ency 4D2S(6 !as reprimanded for a trio of offenses committed o$er the span of a year# 2n$esti"ators found that the specialist used his D2S( Go$ernment tra$el card to pay for @2'539#:9 !orth of food' "as' and rental cars !hile on personal trips to 2ndiana to $isit his "irlfriend# The specialist additionally claimed per diem allo!ances for t!o days on !hich he !as technically ( sent <ithout Jea$e 4(<OJ6# &inally' the specialist used his Go$ernment cell phone to ma+e personal phone calls such that unofficial use comprised any!here from 30090U of his total usa"e# The specialist !as suspended for three days' reim ursed the Go$ernment @1'3E:#3E for his cell phone a use' paid off his Go$ernment credit card' and too+ t!o days of lea$e to account for his period (<OJ#

%unnin' .p the !o ernment /I&PAC2 Card
The FactsE ( 4former6 ci$ilian director of the )enta"on’s Graphics and )resentation Di$ision used her Go$ernment0issued' /erchant )urchase (uthori;ation Card 4>2/)(C?6 to ma+e 922 fa+e purchases from a Seattle company created y a fello! schemer solely to carry out the fraud# )ayments y the Go$ernment for the >purchases? !ere made to the Seattle firm' ut the co0schemer !ould simply cash the chec+s and split the >ta+e? !ith the director# The director !as cau"ht and sentenced to three years and one month in prison and !as ordered to pay @1#5 million in restitution# The -a,E Don’t steal# Theft $iolates $arious state and &ederal la!s# 98

Senior NC* Abuses !o ernment Credit Card
(n in$esti"ation concluded that a senior U#S# /arine improperly used his Go$ernment credit card y purchasin" "as for his personal $ehicle' dinners' and concert tic+ets as !ell as o tainin" cash ad$ancesCall unrelated to official tra$el# The /arine !as counseled y his super$isor and re.uired to reim urse the Go$ernment for all unauthori;ed purchases# Be retired soon after the in$esti"ation#

DoD Employee Char'es Caribbean 7acation to !o ernment Credit Card
( GS013 Department of Defense employee used her Go$ernment credit card to pay for her personal $acation to the Cari ean# The case !as referred to the U#S# (ttorney' !ho declined prosecution# The employee !as counseled y her super$isor and !arned that if any other inappropriate char"es !ere made on her account she !ould e disciplined# 4Pes' she reim ursed the Go$ernment#6

Department of Defense Employee &akes CB4;;; in Personal Char'es
(n in$esti"ation re$ealed that a Department of Defense ci$ilian employee had made inappropriate' personal char"es in the amount of o$er @7'000 usin" his "o$ernment tra$el card# The employee !as suspended !ithout pay for failin" to follo! the terms of the credit card use policy#

Public *fficial &isuses Credit Card
( Department of =ner"y employee recently pled "uilty to a theft of Go$ernment property char"e# The employee made o$er @5'000 in personal char"es on her Go$ernment credit card y hidin" the char"es amon" le"itimate Go$ernment purchases# The employee also falsified in$oices and credit card records to further conceal the purchases# The employee !as sentenced to t!o years pro ation and ordered to pay restitution for the amount of the char"es#

Department of 7eterans Affairs Employee &isuses Credit Card


( former Department of ,eterans (ffairs employee recently pled "uilty to one count of theft of Go$ernment property# The former employee used her Go$ernment credit card to purchase e%pensi$e items 4T,s !ere a fa$orite6' !hich she then re0sold or +ept for herself# The *ud"e sentenced her to fi$e years pro ation and ordered her to pay @150'000 in restitution#

Department of Defense Ci ilian Employee &isuses Credit Card
( Department of Defense ci$ilian employee recently pled "uilty to one count of theft of Go$ernment property# The employee entered into an arran"ement !ith t!o $endors in !hich they !ould char"e the Go$ernment credit card for non0e%istent "oods and ser$ices# The $endors !ould then "i$e cash to the DoD employee# The $endors char"ed o$er @12'000 and +ic+ed ac+ @3'000 to the employee# The employee !as sentenced to t!o years pro ation !ith four months home confinement' and ordered to pay @12':53 in restitution and a @1'000 fine#

.(S( !o ernment I&PAC Credit Card Abuse by Air Force Employees
Three former ci$ilian employees from -ar+sdale (ir &orce -ase' Jouisiana' !ere con$icted of conspiracy to defraud the Go$ernment 41E U#S#C# 3516 and con$ersion of U#S# property for personal use 41E U#S#C# 7:16# The employees used the U#S# Go$ernment 2/)(C credit cards to purchase personal items' !hich included e%tensi$e home impro$ement products and car0related materials# One of the employees certified on official documents that purchases on the 2/)(C credit card !ere properly used y mem ers of the reser$e unit# One of the employees !as sentenced to a one year and one day prison term' and the other employees !ere sentenced to si% months in a &ederal half!ay house and !ere re.uired to ma+e full restitution#

Cardholder Super isor Con icted for Credit Card Abuse
The super$isor of four 2/)(C cardholders !as con$icted for misusin" Go$ernment credit cards# The super$isor used the credit card num ers of his four su ordinates' none of !hom !ere suspected of any !ron"doin"' to ma+e multiple purchases from a local auto parts store and a military surplus store# The super$isor then 71

proceeded to re0sell most of the products at his ar# Some of the items purchased included "as "rills' truc+ parts' and automo ile tires# The super$isor con$inced the mana"ers of the auto parts store and the military surplus store to alter the credit card in$oices to list !hat !ould appear to e official military supplies' instead of listin" the actual "oods purchased# The e$idence indicates that the DoD super$isor defrauded the Go$ernment to the tune of @200'000# The employee pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2E5' for su mittin" false and fraudulent claims' and 1E U#S#C# 20E' for appro$in" the fraudulent purchases# Be !as sentenced to ten months in prison#

Accountant !oes to 5ail for &isuse of Tra el Card
( super$isory accountant at the Kational Science &oundation 4KS&6 found herself at the recei$in" end of criminal char"es for "o$ernment tra$el card a useCa situation that should ha$e come as no surprise' "i$en that her responsi ilities included mana"in" the KS&’s tra$el card pro"ram# 2n$esti"ators found that on forty0se$en separate occasions' the accountant used her tra$el card to ma+e personal purchases and unauthori;ed cash !ithdra!als# <hen the 2n$esti"ator General e"an an audit of the tra$el card pro"ram' the accountant pur"ed her o!n transactions from the records in an 4unsuccessful6 attempt to hide her misuse# The formerly footloose accountant !as saddled !ith a @1'000 fine and sentenced to 20 !ee+ends in *ail as a condition of a t!o0year pro ation# Ber misuse of the tra$el card not only ended her career at KS&' ut arred her from all future federal employment# Go$ernment tra$el cards should only e used for e%penses related to official tra$el#

Employee Faces #; 0ears for Theft of Credit Cards
&ollo!in" up on t!o stolen Go$ernment credit cards' in$esti"ators cut short the entrepreneurial career of a utility !or+er for the Korfol+ Ka$al Station )u lic <or+s Center# (fter stealin" the t!o cards' !hich !ere used to "as fleet $ehicles' the !or+er e"an to offer to fill the tan+s of other "as station patrons in e%chan"e for cash $aluin" half the pump price# The !or+er’s popularity !as short0li$ed' ho!e$er' as in$esti"ators .uic+ly noticed the sudden oom at the pumps# (n internal audit conducted y the Ka$y re$ealed that the loss to the Go$ernment from the t!o purloined cards totaled @::'E77# 72

The employee faces a ma%imum sentence of ten years imprisonment and a fine of @290'000#

Friend+s Credit Card .se Costs Employee C#K4;;;
(n (rmy recruiter in Christians ur"' ,ir"inia paid the price for "iftin" a Go$ernment credit card to a friend 1 literally# <hen the recruiter’s office issued the recruiter a Go$ernment &leet credit card' he ma"nanimously decided to "i$e the card to his friend# Bis friend su se.uently used the no!0stolen card for personal e%penditures totalin" o$er @13'000' includin" "asoline' automoti$e parts' and food# The recruiter’s >"enerosity? !as amply re!arded y the District Court *ud"e' !ho sentenced him to t!o years of pro ation and held him lia le for the total @13'000 spent y his friend# The Go$ernment &leet credit card pro"ram pro$ides for the maintenance of Go$ernment o!ned and leased $ehicles and is only to e used y authori;ed employees for official purposes#

Federal Employee Stole Credit Card Numbers to )ire Prostitutes
( former Transportation Department employee pled "uilty to one count of !ire fraud for usin" counterfeit chec+s and stolen credit card information to hire prostitutes !hile conductin" official Go$ernment usiness# The &ederal employee' !ho has e"un treatment for se%ual addiction' accumulated at least @38'000 from o$er 100 escort ser$ices# The employee stole his collea"ues’ credit card num ers and the receipts of random stran"ers that he found left on restaurant ta les# The employee admitted he often pretended to e the senior $ice president of a pu licly traded company durin" his >shoppin"? trips# ( court sentenced the official to ser$e si% months house arrest and three years pro ation# (Source: 'nternational )erald 2ribune, (arch $3, 2 4%



SES .ses Title to Promote Non"Federal Entity
( Senior =%ecuti$e Ser$ice employee ser$ed on the oard of directors of a non0 &ederal entity 4K&=6# <hile on the oard' he listed his official position and DoD contact information on the K&=’s <e site# )rior to this ethical $iolation' he had failed to re.uest a le"al opinion re"ardin" his ties to the K&=# Be !as counseled and told to remo$e his title from K&= materials#

Ser ice *fficer Sanctions @ebsite by @earin' .niform
( Ser$ice officer allo!ed her photo"raph' !hile !earin" her uniform' to appear on the !e site of a non0federal or"ani;ation# The !e site identified her as a -oard /em er of the or"ani;ation# The postin" created the impression the officer !as participatin" in the mana"ement of the K&= in her official capacity' or alternati$ely' that the &ederal Go$ernment endorsed the or"ani;ation 4in $iolation of 9 C#&#A# 2739#5024 6# The officer !as $er ally counseled and the picture on the !e site !as cropped to co$er the uniform#

Be Careful from )ere *n,ard
Se$en senior military officers' includin" four Generals' !ere found to ha$e misused their positions' improperly implyin" DoD endorsement or support of a Kon0 &ederal =ntity !hile appearin" in a promotional $ideo for the Christian =m assy# ( )enta"on Chaplain arran"ed for Christian =m assy employees to o tain )enta"on uildin" passes for filmin"# The $ideo sho!ed inter$ie!s conducted at reco"ni;a le )enta"on locations' featurin" the senior officers in uniform and displayin" their ran+s as they discussed their Christian faith# T!o S=S Go$ernment employees !ho appeared in the $ideo !ithout title and !hose comments did not create the appearance of DoD sanction !ere found to ha$e properly participated in their personal capacity# The military officers' ho!e$er' $iolated )ara"raph 30208 of DoD 9900#50A' Joint =thics Ae"ulation !hich prohi its actions y employees su""estin" DoD endorsement of Kon0&ederal =ntities' and C#&#A# 2739#502 !hich prohi its usin" one’s pu lic office for pri$ate endorsement#


Financial Disclosure 7iolations
7alley Fraud
( former official of the Tennessee ,alley (uthority 4T,(6 recei$ed t!o years pro ation and !as ordered to pay a @9'000 fine and perform 190 hours of community ser$ice for failin" to disclose information on his financial disclosure form# John Symonds pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# M 1001 for ma+in" a false material statement y failin" to disclose information re"ardin" the receipt of money from a source other than his U#S# Go$ernment salary on his financial disclosure form# <hile !or+in" as a mana"er for T,( from Ko$em er 2000 throu"h Decem er 2002' Symonds !as re.uired to complete an =%ecuti$e -ranch Confidential &inancial Disclosure Aeport' Office of Go$ernment =thics 4OG=6 &orm :90' as !ell as update his financial disclosure report annually y su mittin" Optional OG= &orm :900(# Despite o!nin" a company that recei$ed o$er @90'000 in 2002 from another company' Symonds filed an OG= &orm :900( certifyin" that he had no ne! reporta le assets or sources of income# Symonds and his former spouse used the payments for personal e%penses#

Failure to %eport !ifts From Abramoff !ets D*I *fficial T,o"0ears of Probation
( former Department of the 2nterior Officer !ho accepted <ashin"ton Aeds+ins tic+ets' !hich cost o$er @2'000' as !ell as other "ifts from lo yist Jac+ ( ramoff' !as sentenced to t!o years of pro ation' and to pay a @1'000 fine# ( ramoff !as see+in" official action from the officer !hen he "a$e the officer the "ifts# The officer failed to disclose these "ifts on the re.uired financial disclosure report 4&orm :906' and after ein" in$esti"ated in connection !ith the ( ramoff scandal' he pled "uilty to ma+in" a false certificate or !ritin"# )u lic officials !ho are re.uired to file a &orm :90 must disclose "ifts that e%ceed a minimum $alue# -ottom lineG if pu lic officials +eep secrets a out the "ifts they recei$e from sources li+e lo yists' they !ill recei$e a "ift from the federal "o$ernment that they cannot +eep secret C pro ation#

-a,yer Says Financial Disclosures Are a Nuisance4 Client !ets Probation

( !orld0reno!ned (l;heimer’s research scientist for the Kational 2nstitutes of Bealth 4K2B6 !as sentenced to ser$e t!o years of pro ation and four0hundred hours of community ser$ice after failin" to disclose se$eral hundred0thousand dollars in consultin" fees he recei$ed for ser$ices rendered to a prohi ited source C a pharmaceutical company doin" usiness !ith his a"ency# The scientist $iolated a federal conflicts of interest statute and federal re"ulations re.uirin" him to disclose payments from outside sources on his financial disclosure report 4&orm :906# The purpose of the re.uired financial disclosure is to help employees reco"ni;e conflictin" financial interests and a$oid $iolatin" the la!# The scientist’s la!yer said that it is common for K2B researchers not to file financial disclosures ecause they consider the disclosures a > ureaucratic nuisance#? /ay e so' ut this scientist should ha$e +no!n' as most !orld0 reno!ned medical researchers pro a ly do' that untreated nuisances often ecome de ilitatin" illnesses# 2n addition to pro ation and four0hundred hours of community ser$ice' the scientist !as also forced to forfeit the consultin" fees he had recei$ed from the pharmaceutical company' and !as depri$ed of his retirement from the "o$ernment#

Consultant Fails to File Financial Disclosure %eport4 Pays Fine Instead
( DoD Consultant failed to file the final pu lic financial disclosure report !hen the Consultant’s appointment e%pired# The Consultant recei$ed se$eral reminders' ut chose to i"nore them and ne$er filed the report# Unfortunately' the Consultant !as una le to i"nore the Department of Justice# (fter su stantial ne"otiations' the filer a"reed to pay a @2'000 fine' to pay the @200 late filin" fee' and to file the financial disclosure report that should ha$e een filed in the first place# 4(nd don’t for"et the attorney fees6 -ottom lineG &ailure to file a financial disclosure report !as $ery costly# 4DoD Standards of Conduct Office6

).D Employee Fails to Disclose Ill"!otten %eal Estate on Financial Disclosure4 -oses 5ob
( BUD employee’s spouse0li+e partner su mitted the !innin" id for a BUD0 o!ned property# (mon" other $iolations' the BUD employee failed to notify the a"ency that someone !ith !hom she !as li$in" !as su mittin" a id for the property# (fter the


property !as purchased' the employee’s partner transferred the property to the employee for @1# To pre$ent BUD from learnin" that the property came to the employee throu"h a stra!0man transaction' the employee failed to list the property on her financial disclosure report as !as re.uired# The employee !as found to ha$e falsified her financial disclosure report and !as fired#

Failin' to %eport !ift -eads to FBI A'ent %esi'nation
( Super$isory Special ("ent 4SS(6 in the Charlotte' Korth Carolina &-2 field office !as forced to resi"n in the !a+e of re$elations that he had failed to disclose "ifts from a suspect in an or"ani;ed "am lin" and money launderin" in$esti"ation# The SS( had een actin" head of the <hite Collar Crime S.uad' !hich !as handlin" the in$esti"ationH he had also ser$ed as the suspect’s official handler after the suspect a"reed to cooperate !ith in$esti"ators# Due to his duties' the SS( !as re.uired to file an OG= &orm :90' the Confidential &inancial Disclosure Aeport# The SS( certified that he had recei$ed no "ifts or tra$el reim ursements from any one source totalin" more than @270#00# Bo!e$er' in$esti"ators soon learned that on t!o separate occasions' the SS( had accompanied the suspect to Jas ,e"as' !here the suspect paid for the SS(’s hotel and "am lin" e%penses# The $alue of the trips !as estimated to e in e%cess of @7'000# The SS( pled "uilty to 1E U#S#C# 101E' ma+in" a false !ritin"# Be !as forced to resi"n from the &-2 and !as sentenced to t!o years’ pro ation and :00 hours of community ser$ice#

C##4;;; Fine for Failure to File
The FactsE ( former Census -ureau official !as assessed the ma%imum fine !hen he failed to file his financial disclosure report as re.uired y la! upon endin" his Go$ernment employment# -efore his retirement' the official had recei$ed multiple memos remindin" him of his o li"ationH after he missed the filin" deadline' the official recei$ed a num er of additional certified letters informin" him of the a$aila ility of e%tensions and the conse.uences of failin" to file# The Department of Commerce e$entually referred the matter to the Department of Justice' !hich filed a complaint alle"in" that the official +no!in"ly and !illin"ly failed to file a financial disclosure report# &indin" the official a totally unresponsi$e party !ith 75

fla"rant $iolations' a &ederal court entered the default *ud"ment and ordered an @11'000 fine' the top ci$il penalty permitted under the statute# The court emphasi;ed the fla"rancy of the $iolation' citin" the employee’s choice to i"nore the multiple notices and !arnin"s pro$ided to him# (Source: &nited States 56 7ant, *o6 2823$2, 2 $4, 2 3%6% The -a,E The =thics in Go$ernment (ct 4=2G(6' 9 U#S#C# app# M 101 et se.# 420036' re.uires senior officials' !ho file S& 25Es' to file a final financial disclosure report >on or efore the thirtieth day? after termination of their senior positions 4in addition to annual filin" re.uirements6# (nyone !ho +no!in"ly and !illfully fails to pro$ide such a disclosure faces prosecution and fines of up to @10'000 4see 9 U#S#C# app# M 1014e604f6' app# M 10:6# 3 &6S6 0ist6 9E:'S $ !2 (0606;6 <une

D(C( &ayor Financial Disclosure
The failure to report @:0'000 he had earned in consultin" contracts cost the /ayor of <ashin"ton' D#C#' @1000 se$eral years a"o# The /ayor $iolated the cityDs campai"n finance code y ne"lectin" to report these earnin"s on his financial disclosure report# Under 9 C#&#A# 273:#501' !illful failure to file a pu lic financial disclosure report 4S& 25E6 or !illful falsification of any information re.uired to e reported may result in administrati$e actions or @10'000 in ci$il penalties# 2n addition' criminal actions may e rou"ht a"ainst &ederal officials !ho pro$ide false information on their financial disclosure reports#

Former !o ernment *fficial Con icted for Filin' False Financial Disclosure %eport
Under the =thics in Go$ernment (ct' a former Chief of Staff 4CoS6 for the Secretary of ("riculture !as re.uired to file the )u lic &inancial Disclosure Aeport 4S& 25E6# <hile in office' the CoS and his !ife recei$ed payments totalin" appro%imately @22'029 from t!o usinessmen !ho !ere lon"time friends and usiness associates of the CoS' and !ho coincidentally recei$ed su sidies from the Department of ("riculture 4USD(6 totalin" @73'000 and @2E:'000' respecti$ely# The CoS !as re.uired to' ut did not' report these payments on his S& 25E# <hile the USD( 2nspector General !as 7E

conductin" an in$esti"ation of the CoS !ith respect to conflict of interest alle"ations' the CoS made a s!orn declaration that he had not recei$ed such payments# Be also stated that his only income from the time he ecame Chief of Staff' aside from the sale of a former residence' !as his USD( salary# The former CoS !as con$icted of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 1001' for failin" to disclose the payments recei$ed from the t!o usinessmen durin" on his S& 25E and for ma+in" a false s!orn statement to the USD( 2nspector General# Be !as sentenced to 25 months in *ail#

Former EE*C Chairman Failed to File Financial Disclosure %eport
The former chairman of the =.ual =mployment Opportunity Commission settled a la!suit rou"ht y the Department of Justice for @:'000# The la!suit alle"ed that the chairman did not file a re.uired financial disclosure report for t!o years that he !as in Go$ernment ser$ice# 2n the pre$ious year' the chairman filed the yearly financial disclosure report re.uired of all senior e%ecuti$e ranch employees 4S& 25E6# &or the su se.uent t!o years' ho!e$er' he su mitted a photocopy of the first year’s report# The Chairman ac+no!led"ed that the photocopied report did not reflect chan"es in his income# Be further maintained that the inaccuracy !as inad$ertent and the result of a mista+e made in "ood faith# The Director of the Office of Go$ernment =thics noted that the chairman did not respond to four re.uests to file the re.uired report o$er the course of t!o years#

Former FDA Commissioner Con icted for False Financial Disclosures and Conflict of Interest
The U#S# District Court for the District of Colum ia sentenced a former Commissioner of the &ood and Dru" (dministration 4&D(6 to ser$e three years of pro ation' alon" !ith 90 hours of community ser$ice' and to pay fines totalin" @E8'355#37# The former Commissioner pled "uilty to t!o misdemeanor char"es in$ol$in" false financial disclosures and a $iolation of the conflict of interest statute' 1E U#S#C# 20E' !hich prohi its a Go$ernment employee from participatin" in any acti$ities in !hich he' his spouse' or minor child has a financial interest#


-et!een 2002 and 2007' the former Commissioner held se$eral senior positions !hich re.uired him to certify and file on si% occasions a financial disclosure report that included all of his in$estments $alued at more than @1'000# (lthou"h the Commissioner declared he and his !ife had sold the stoc+ they o!ned in numerous >si"nificantly re"ulated or"ani;ations'? the couple failed to disclose that they actually retained stoc+ in se$eral of the companies# The conflict of interest $iolation occurred !hen the Commissioner !as actin" as the Chairman of the &D(’s O esity <or+in" Group# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered t!o of the companies in !hich the Commissioner and his !ife held stoc+ had a direct financial interest in the "roup’s conclusions# (lthou"h there !as no e$idence that the Commissioner’s financial interests altered the "roup’s conclusions' the Court concluded that his participation in the deli erations affected the inte"rity of "roup’s findin"s# (Source: Federal Ethics Report, (arch 2 4%

Fraud 87iolations Not Co ered Else,here<
0our Posters are &y Posters
(n army officer !as con$icted oth for ma+in" false statements' includin" false statements in his confidential financial disclosure report 4failure to report an outside position and the income from that position6' and for stealin" "o$ernment property# The employee put in an order at the department print shop' certifyin" that a series of posters !ere for official usiness# The posters !ere actually for the employee’s side usiness# (dditionally' the employee purchased a conference ta le' for !hich his o!n usiness "ot a @:00 credit to!ard a conference ta le of its o!n# The employee !as sentenced to 2 years of pro ation' 7 months house arrest' a fine of @29'000' and !as ordered to pay @1'700 in restitution#

Ser ice"member Pockets BA) &oney
&or t!o years after his di$orce' an acti$e duty ser$ice0mem er continued to list his e%0!ife on his -asic (llo!ance for Bousin" paper!or+' allo!in" him to poc+et e%tra funds' includin" a family separation allo!ance# <hile the o$erpayment continued for t!o years' the ser$ice0mem er continued to +eep the money# Once the command cau"ht


on' he !as court martialed' sentenced to si% months confinement' fined' and reduced in ran+#

7eterinarian Technicians Pocket Thousands
(n =07 and =0:' oth $eterinarian technicians for a ser$ice' recei$ed -asic (llo!ance for Bousin" to !hich they !ere not entitled# They li$ed in ase housin" !hile recei$in" o$erpayments# They too+ no action to report the mista+e# O$erall' the Go$ernment lost more than @27'000# -oth ser$ice0mem ers !ere reduced in ran+ and ordered to repay all funds#

/I thou'ht they ,ere mine(2
( "o$ernment contractor stole ei"ht :00foot Container =%press 4COK=L6 shippin"Rstora"e units $alued at @97'000 from a Ser$ice ase in the United States# 2n$esti"ators found t!o stolen "o$ernment license plates on the contractor’s personal $ehicles' used to access the ase# The contractor claimed he thou"ht the COK=L units !ere a andoned# Be !as char"ed !ith "rand larceny and de arred from doin" usiness !ith the "o$ernment#

/I do2 > Thou'h I Don+t E en Jno, 0ou
Si% Ser$ice mem ers stationed in the United States !ere arrested and char"ed !ith defraudin" the "o$ernment for their part in a scheme to marry Aussian !omen in e%chan"e for dra!in" military enefits# The rother of one of the ser$ice0mem ers setup the introduction to the Aussian !omen !hile li$in" in Ke! Por+# The ser$ice0mem ers then filed false asic allo!ance for housin" 4-(B6 and family separation allo!ance 4&S(6 claims for their a sent !i$es that defrauded the "o$ernment of o$er @23:'000# The in$esti"ation re$ealed most of the men ne$er actually li$ed !ith their so0called !i$es# The ser$ice0mem ers !ere court0martialed' reduced in ran+' and ordered to pay restitution e.ualin" the amount of money each recei$ed fraudulently# The !omen' !ho o tained $isas ena lin" them to stay in the States as a result of the false marria"es' !ere deported#

Side Business Ends Ser ice Supply Chief+s Career

( Ser$ice Chief store+eeper for a su marine in the United States !as found "uilty of usin" ship’s funds to uy merchandise to later sell for his personal "ain# The Chief made off !ith o$er @80'000 of unauthori;ed items includin" !atches' computers' )D(s' T,s' chairs' and cameras' !hich he stored in his personal room until sellin"# Be !as court0martialed and sentenced to t!o years in prison' reduced do!n to an =01' separated under a ad conduct dischar"e' and ordered to pay @29'000 in fines# Bis immediate super$isor' a *unior Ser$ice officer' !as administrati$ely separated from the Ser$ice# @59'000 !orth of merchandise !as ne$er reco$ered#

Ne, 0ork State of &ind
( Ser$ice ser"eant !as court0martialed for fraud and larceny of "o$ernment funds' for +no!in"ly su mittin" false asic allo!ance for housin" 4-(B6 claims for three years !hile stationed o$erseas# The ser"eant claimed his !ife and +ids !ere li$in" in Ke! Por+ City' the hi"hest -(B city in the system' !hile they !ere actually li$in" in )uerto Aico# The ser"eant recei$ed o$er @90'000 he !as not entitled to under the false claims# Be !as sentenced to t!el$e years in prison' reduced to =01' and dishonora ly dischar"ed#

&arried or NotG
( soldier "ot married and pro$ided his marria"e certificate to the Ser$ice' ut shortly after the marria"e his !ife returned to her home in another state# Kine months later the marria"e !as annulled# The soldier did not report that he !as no lon"er married' and continued to collect a housin" allo!ance for himself and his no! former !ife# Be also listed her on tra$el reim ursements and recei$ed additional per diem for trips !here she did not accompany him# 2n total' the soldier !as paid appro%imately @:9'000 in funds that he !as not eli"i le to recei$e# (t some point' the soldier appeared to sense that he !as "oin" to e cau"ht ecause he tried to thro! off the in$esti"ation y filin" for di$orce e$en thou"h the marria"e had een annulled much earlier# Be then informed in$esti"ators that he !as not a!are that the marria"e had een annulled prior to his di$orce filin"# The ruse !as not particularly effecti$e ecause court records sho!ed the soldier !as physically present at the annulment hearin"# Bis case !as referred for court martial# 52

Ima'inary Ball and Chain Dra's Staff Ser'eants Do,n
(n (rmy Staff Ser"eant stationed at &t# -ra""' Korth Carolina continued to recei$e -asic (llo!ance for Bousin" 4-(B6 at the married rate e$en after he !as di$orced from his !ife# Be +no!in"ly and !illfully failed to su mit documentation to reflect this chan"e' thus recei$in" more money than he !as entitled to and therefore committin" fraud and larceny# The Staff Ser"eant !as char"ed !ith larceny under the Uniform Code of /ilitary Justice and found "uilty y General Court /artial# Be !as sentenced to fi$e months in confinement' forfeiture of @9'000 and a reduction in "rade from Staff Ser"eant 4=076 to )ri$ate &irst Class 4=036# 2n a similar case' a Staff Ser"eant at U#S# (rmy C=KTCO/ !as cau"ht ille"ally recei$in" -(B at the hi"her married rate !hen he !as actually sin"le# The soldier su mitted a false marria"e license' ultimately recei$in" @19'100 in -asic (llo!ance for Bousin" and &amily Separation (llo!ance to !hich he !as not entitled# Bis >!ife? also fraudulently recei$ed @13'200 in Tricare healthcare enefits# The relationship must ha$e "one sour thou"h' ecause she ended up turnin" him in to military in$esti"ators# (fter such a etrayal' one can only assume he !ill no! e filin" for a fa+e di$orce#

All"EDpenses Paid Bachelor Pad ,ith &aid Ser ice IncludedG
( Jieutenant Commander !or+in" as the Ka$al Station Great Ja+es -achelor Bousin" Officer misused Go$ernment resources !hen he li$ed in the .uarters !ithout cost and recei$ed free house+eepin" and amenities# Be !as char"ed on three counts under the Uniform Code of /ilitary Justice 4(rticles E1' 82' and 13:6 and issued a Jetter of Aeprimand as a form of Kon0Judicial )unishment# ( ci$ilian Go$ernment official !ho !as a!are of the Jieutenant Commander’s ille"al conduct' ut failed to report it !as also issued a Jetter of Aeprimand for $iolatin" the -asic O li"ation of )u lic Ser$ice re.uirin" that he disclose any +no!n fraud' !aste' a use' and corruption 4C#&#A# 2739#1014 641166#

)andlin' of Ser ice &embers+ In?ury Claims @ounds !o ernment Financially


( Ka$y ci$ilian /edicare claims e%aminer !as employed to represent Go$ernment interests in the settlement of /edical Care Aeco$ery (ct 4/CA(6 claims# Ber *o entailed re"ularly ne"otiatin" !ith insurance companies and in*ured military personnel in order to reco$er Go$ernment e%penditures on medical care for ser$ice mem ers and their dependents !ho !ere in*ured due to the acts of uninsured third parties# (lthou"h the Ka$y has authority to !ai$e its claims on ehalf of in*ured ser$ice mem ers a"ainst insurance companies' the e%aminer orchestrated a scheme in !hich she used her position and authority to !ai$e claims and to fraudulently o tain money for herself that !as o!ed to the Go$ernment# 2n one case' the e%aminer handled the claim for a )etty Officer !ho had een in*ured in a motorcycle accident# She told the ser$ice mem er that she could increase the amount of his settlement if he a"reed to split the amount !ith her# <hen he a"reed' the e%aminer notified the insurance company that the Ka$y !as !ai$in" its /AC( claim# <hen the company sent the )etty Officer a @7'000 chec+' he sent her @3'000 cash *ust as she had directed# 2t turned out that the )etty Officer had een !or+in" !ith la! enforcement authorities all alon"# The U#S# (ttorney prosecuted the e%aminer and o tained a con$iction for one count of /ail &raud# She !as sentenced to t!o months in prison' t!o years of pro ation' a @100 special assessment' and !as de arred y the Ka$y for three years#

In oices Submitted on Behalf of &akeBelie eCompany4 Inc(
( ci$ilian employee and Go$ernment purchase card holder !or+in" at the Ka$al Surface <arfare Center 4KS<C6 in /aryland conspired !ith an outside $endor to create fraudulent in$oices in the name of fictitious companies such as Green!ay Supply' Go$ernment Supply' and (erospace Technolo"ies# The in$oices fraudulently sho!ed that these ima"inary companies had pro$ided "oods and ser$ices to KS<C !hen in fact no products or ser$ices !ere e$er pro$ided# The Go$ernment employee used his purchase card to pay for hundreds of such in$oices' all in amounts of less than @2'900 so as to a$oid attractin" too much scrutiny# <hen KS<C too+ a!ay the employee’s purchase card' the $endor continued to su mit the false in$oices in cooperation !ith a second employee# Ultimately' the $endor made et!een @200'000 and @:00'000 in profit from the conspiracy# (ll three people in$ol$ed !ere "uilty of ma+in" false and


fraudulent statements to the Go$ernment and em e;;lin" money elon"in" to KS<C# The $endor pled "uilty to one count of conspiracy to defraud the Go$ernment' 1E U#S#C# M351# The Ka$y de arred the $endor and oth employees for three years#

&arine Corps Say !oodbye to *fficers ,ho Schemed ,ith Thai 7endors
Three U#S# /arine Corps &orces )acific' Joint U#S# /ilitary Group' Thailand 4JUS/(GTB(26 officers !ere cau"ht recei$in" ri es and +ic+ ac+s from a Thai $endor# ( Ka$al Criminal 2n$esti"ati$e Ser$ice in$esti"ation re$ealed that a /arine Corps /a*or' either directly or throu"h his !ife' accepted appro%imately @100'000 in "ifts from a Thai $endor' to include a truc+ and a loan for a house# The /a*or continued to en"a"e in usiness !ith the $endor and a!arded him contracts' ut did not disclose his personal financial conflict of interest to his a"ency desi"nee as mandated y 1E U#S#C# M20E# Be also passed inside information to the $endor' allo!in" her to increase her id !hile still ensurin" she !as the lo!est idder and therefore increasin" her profit mar"in# Be !as also char"ed !ith maintainin" a se%ual relationship !ith a !oman !ho !as not his !ife' !hich is ille"al under the Uniform Code of /ilitary Justice# (nother /arine Corps /a*or recei$ed "ifts' includin" free hotel rooms' from a prohi ited source in $iolation of 10 U#S#C# section E82 and section 833# (dditionally' a third /arine Corps /a*or also !or+ed !ith the $endor to defraud the Go$ernment# The /a*or' ta+in" ad$anta"e of his position as the first person in the lo"istics chain to come into contact !ith "oods and ser$ices pro$ided y contractors' si"ned receipts for deli$ery of purchase orders e$en thou"h the $endor had only deli$ered incomplete shipments# The Go$ernment !as nonetheless illed the cost of full shipment' !hile the conspirin" parties split the profits from these >"host shipments#? The /a*or si"ned orders for at least fi$e "host shipments and recei$ed @2'32: in ri es for his participation# (ll three /a*ors !ere de arred from Go$ernment contractin" y the Ka$y (c.uisition 2nte"rity Office# &urthermore' they !ere all char"ed under the Uniform Code of /ilitary Justice# The first /a*or !as dismissed from acti$e duty' sentenced to four years in confinement and a @29'000 fine# The second /a*or recei$ed a )uniti$e Jetter of Aeprimand and !as su *ected to a @3'070 forfeiture of pay# The third /a*or !as dischar"ed and sent to spend si% months in the ri"# 59

* erpricin' by Contractor %esults in CAA4;;; %efund
(n (rmy technician orderin" a Seal Aeplacement )arts Iit from a defense contractor noted that the price of the +it seemed unusually hi"h ased on the price of each indi$idual component' and contacted in$esti"ators# 2n$esti"ators e%amined the price of the components and the cost the company incurred to assem le each +it' and disco$ered that the contractor !as mar+in" up each +it y appro%imately @900# 2n$esti"ators further disco$ered that the Go$ernment had purchased a lar"e num er of the +its at the inflated price# (s a result of the o ser$ant technician’s num er0crunchin"' the defense contractor a"reed to a $oluntary refund of @::'000#

Fa oritism %esults in Senior *fficial+s %esi'nation
( senior official at the Kational Defense Uni$ersity left his post after his relationship !ith a su ordinate came to li"ht# =mployees told in$esti"ators that they had !itnessed inappropriate physical contact et!een the official and a component pro"ram director# The official alle"edly fa$ored the pro"ram director y appro$in" lea$e re.uests durin" critical periods' affordin" her more authority than her position entitled her' "i$in" her leniency re"ardin" her !or+ schedule' and consistently relyin" on her opinion a o$e others# The official !as also accused of creatin" a hostile !or+ en$ironment y repeatedly demeanin" employees# The pro"ram director !as separately char"ed !ith misusin" Go$ernment property y ta+in" e%cessi$e lea$e and misreportin" time and attendance# The official resi"ned his post' and the pro"ram director !as detailed to a different component and recei$ed counselin"#

Contractor Fraud %esults in In esti'ation
Contractors !ho !ere a!arded a @97: million contract to construct the Olmsted Dam on the Ohio Ai$er found themsel$es hi"h and dry after the disco$ery of fraudulent reim ursement char"es illed to the Go$ernment# The contractors had purchased a num er of $ehicles to e used on the *o ' and properly illed the purchase cost to the 57

Go$ernment# Bo!e$er' in$esti"ators disco$ered that the contractors allo!ed ei"ht senior0le$el employees to dri$e their $ehicles home at ni"ht as part of an >incenti$es? pro"ram# These contractors !ere further in$ol$ed in three accidents !ith the $ehicles' the cost of !hich !as su mitted for reim ursement to the Go$ernment#

To Defraud or Not To DefraudG That+s an Easy Nuestion6
The FactsE (n 2nternal Ae$enue Ser$ice 42AS6 officer conspired !ith t!o pri$ate ta% preparers to de$elop a scheme to defraud the United States Go$ernment# The ta% preparers told persons o!in" money to the Go$ernment that they could ne"otiate a lesser de t if they !ould "o ahead and pay off !hat !as o!ed# The 2AS officer !ould then enter false information into the rele$ant files sho!in" that the indi$iduals in .uestion had insufficient assets to co$er their de ts# This con$inced the 2AS to halt collection efforts# Stran"ely 4or not6' the money paid to the ta% preparers ne$er made it to the 2AS# The ta% preparers !ere sentenced alon" !ith the 2AS officer' !ho' for tin+erin" !ith the de ts of others' ended up !ith .uite a >de t? of her o!nG She !as sentenced to 3 years and one month in prison' to e follo!ed y 3 years of pro ation' and ordered to pay in restitution @322'139# The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 351 420036 authori;es fines and imprisonment for up to 9 years for anyone conspirin" !ith one or more other persons to defraud the United States' if any one of the conspirators ta+es any action to carry out the fraud# 2n this case' all three persons appear to ha$e ta+en such an act# The 2AS officer in this case !as also char"ed under 27 U#S#C# M 521: 420036 of the 2nternal Ae$enue Code' !hich re.uires that any 2AS officer !ho conspires to defraud the Go$ernment e dischar"ed from their office and' if con$icted' pay up to @10'000 in fines' ser$e up to 9 years in prison' or oth#

Conflicts of Interest and -ies !arner Alder,oman and Dau'hters Federal Con ictions
( /il!au+ee alder!oman and her t!o dau"hters found themsel$es as defendants in federal court for funnelin" city funds to a non0profit or"ani;ation they had created# The alder!oman' efore her election' founded a non0profit or"ani;ation eli"i le to carry out nei"h orhood social "rantsH it !as lar"ely funded y Bousin" and Ur an 55

De$elopment 4BUD6 "rants a!arded to the City of /il!au+ee# These "rants !ere "i$en to the city upon the condition that each "rant recipient comply !ith BUD re"ulations# (mon" these re"ulations !as a conflict0of0interest pro$ision pre$entin" any elected official that participated in the apportionment of the BUD "rants from o tainin" a financial enefit >either for themsel$es or those !ith !hom they ha$e usiness or immediate family ties#? Upon the alder!oman’s election' she turned the e%ecuti$e directorship of the non0 profit or"ani;ation o$er to her t!o dau"hters' !ho oth dre! a salary from the or"ani;ation# -oth dau"hters had different last names from each other as !ell as the alder!oman' and the relationship et!een the three !as un+no!n y the City and BUD# (fter ta+in" office' the alder!oman secured mem ership on the Community De$elopment )olicy Committee' the committee that apportioned BUD "rants# She !as informed y the City (ttorney of the BUD conflict0of0interest rules' and !rote a memo assurin" the City that her hus and and 4sin"ular6 dau"hter only !or+ed for the non0profit on a $olunteer asis# This deception persisted the follo!in" year' !hen the City e"an to suspect a scamH the alder!oman !rote another letter to the city attorney admittin" that her 4sin"ular6 dau"hter had een an employee of the non0profit' ut assurin" that she had since left her position 4!hich !as untrue6# Bo!e$er' y this point' the City !as a!are of the alder!oman’s deception' and she !as char"ed !ith $arious $iolations of federal la!# Durin" the time period the alder!oman !as in office' the non0profit accepted a num er of lucrati$e BUD "rants from the city# =ach contract included a recitation of the BUD conflict0of0interest pro$isions' and !as si"ned y oth dau"hters in their capacity as e%ecuti$e officers# <hen .ueried y the City re"ardin" the familial relation of the t!o dau"hters to the alder!oman' the dau"hters chose not to respond# This duplicity earned oth dau"hters char"es in federal court alon"side their mother# The alder!oman and one of her dau"hters pled "uilty to $arious $iolations of federal la!# The second dau"hter chose to "o to trial' and !as con$icted and sentenced to t!o years’ pro ation and a @1000 fine for $iolatin" her contractual duty to disclose her familial relationship !ith the alder!oman# (Source: 2 ! &6S6 #pp6 9E:'S $ =4=%


Employee !ets Ten 0ears for Authori=in' Fraudulent %etirement Benefits
( retirement enefits specialist at the U#S# Office of )ersonnel /ana"ement 4O)/6 de$eloped an em e;;lement scheme that e$entually in$ol$ed 19 cohorts and resulted in the theft of @3#5 million from the Ci$il Ser$ices Aetirement Trust &und# The specialist’s duties included authori;in" monthly enefits payments as !ell as one0time payments intended to retroacti$ely ad*ust &ederal enefits# 2nstead of authori;in" payments for the proper recipients' the employee e"an to authori;e payments to fello! employees# The scheme allo!ed at least 29 people to o tain ille"al one0time payments from the Aetirement Trust &und' after !hich they paid +ic+ ac+s to the O)/ employees# The specialist !as sentenced to 10 years in prison for her role as the rin"leader of the operation# Ber coconspirators recei$ed lesser terms#

Boyfriends Can Be 7ery EDpensi e For Employees @ho Steal Funds
( U#S# &orest Ser$ice employee faced a ma%imum of 13 years in prison for stealin" o$er @7:2'000 and committin" ta% fraud# The employee paid restitution of the entire @7:2'000 prior to sentencin"# The employee admitted that durin" her *o of o$erseein" payments !ith &ederal char"e cards and Go$ernment chec+s' she !rote Go$ernment chec+s to her oyfriend' !ho occasionally contracted !ith the &orest Ser$ice# Dis"uised as firefi"htin" payments' the chec+s !ere deposited in the couple’s *oint an+ account and used to pay for e%penses and "am lin"# 2t appears this relationship came at a $ery hi"h price# (Source: >regon9i5e6com%

Contractors and Federal Personnel4 @orkin' To'ether4 Defraud the !o ernment and !o to 5ail
(n in$esti"ation y se$eral Go$ernment a"encies in support of the Justice Department’s Kational )rocurement &raud Tas+ &orce re$ealed a comple% scheme to defraud the Coalition )ro$isional (uthority 1 South Central Ae"ion 4C)(0SC6 in al0 Billah' 2ra.# The perpetrators' a former Department of Defense 4DoD6 employee' se$eral former soldiers and numerous pu lic officials' includin" t!o hi"h0ran+in" U#S# (rmy


officers' conspired in a fraud and money0launderin" plan in$ol$in" contracts in the reconstruction of 2ra.# The Tas+ &orce disco$ered the co0conspirators conni$ed to ri" ids on contracts so that C)(0SC a!arded them all to the same contractor# 2n addition' the conspirators stole o$er @2 million in currency that C)(0SC had slated for reconstruction# (s a re!ard for their efforts' the contractor pro$ided the officials !ith a $ariety of "ifts' includin" o$er @1 million in cash' sports cars' *e!elry' computers' li.uor' and offers of future employment# The Tas+ &orce char"ed a former Jieutenant Colonel' t!o acti$e Jieutenant Colonels' a Colonel and t!o ci$ilians in a 290count indictment# The court sentenced the ci$ilian DoD employee to ser$e 12 months in prison' !hile the former Jieutenant Colonel earned 21 months in prison for his role# (nother former soldier recei$ed nine years in prison and a forfeiture of @3#7 million for char"es of conspiracy' ri ery' and money launderin"' as !ell as !eapons possession char"es# The contractor at the center of the conspiracy pled "uilty to related char"es' and recei$ed a :7 month prison sentence# 2n addition' the court ordered him to forfeit @3#7 million# 4Department of Justice 050::8' June 29' 2005' !!!#usdo*#"o$6

*fficial Steals )imself 5ail Time
( former 2ntelli"ence Contin"ency &unds 42C&6 officer for the Department of Defense 4DoD6 stole o$er @100'000 from his former employer# The 2C& official pled "uilty to one count of theft and em e;;lement of Go$ernment property' admittin" that o$er a period of three years he had used his official position to !ithdra! cash from a Go$ernment an+ account# -y falsifyin" DoD accountin" $ouchers and forms' the official increased his o!n an+ account !ith DoD funds !hile he performed his official ud"etin"' dis ursin"' and accountin" duties for 2C&# The U#S# District Jud"e sentenced the official to ser$e 12 months in prison' pay @107'900 in restitution' and ser$e three years of super$ised release# (Source: 0epartment of <ustice 48?$!, <une =, 2 4%

!amblin' and *ther Contest 7iolations

Federal Employee %ides into Trouble
( local motorcycle dealer sponsored a Fmotorcycle po+erF e$ent across pu lic lands# The off0road i+es follo!ed a pre0set route' stoppin" alon" the !ay to pic+ up playin" cards# The one !ith the est po+er hand at the end !on a ne! motorcycle# The !innerO The on0duty Go$ernment employee !ho !as to follo! the contestants' ma+in" sure that no ody had fallen off his i+e or "otten lost# Be didn’t "et to +eep the i+e ecause he !on the pri;e !hile carryin" out his official duty# <hile section 2739#2034 6 496 of the Standards of =thical Conduct for =%ecuti$e -ranch =mployees allo!s &ederal employees to +eep pri;es in contests that are open to the pu lic and not related to the employee’s official duties' in this case' the employee !on !hile performin" official duties#

Fantasy Football IS !amblin'
Gam lin" alle"ations !ere made a"ainst a Department of Defense employee !ho !as operatin" a >fantasy foot all lea"ue? in his !or+place# The participants each paid @20 to participate# The funds !ere used for a luncheon at the end of the season and trophies !ere purchased for the !inners# (lthou"h upon the surface the >fantasy foot all lea"ue? does not appear to e "am lin" per se' the General Counsel ruled that the acti$ities constituted "am lin" in the !or+place in $iolation of para"raph 20302 of DoD 9900#50A' Joint =thics Ae"ulation#

Fantasy Football IS !amblin' II
(lle"ations !ere made re"ardin" (ir Kational Guard mem ers runnin" a >fantasy foot all? lea"ue on Go$ernment computers# =ach mem er of the lea"ue contri uted @10 to play' !ith the !inner uyin" all of the other participants’ pi;;a at the end of the season# 2t !as determined that the !inner actually e%pended more on the pi;;a than the amount of the !innin"s# 2t !as also determined that acti$ities associated !ith the "ame !ere conducted on rea+ and lunch times# Section 20302 of DoD 9900#50A' Joint =thics Ae"ulation' prohi its "am lin" y DoD personnel !hile on duty or !hile on &ederal property# 2n addition' it !as a misuse


of Go$ernment resources to carry out such an acti$ity on Go$ernment computers# The "uardsmen in$ol$ed !ere counseled y their commandin" officer#

!amblin' %in' !arners Federal Char'es
Tipped off y a co!or+er' in$esti"ators disco$ered that a painter at the Department of the 2nterior !as runnin" a full0fled"ed "am lin" operation on Go$ernment premises# <hile on official duty' the painter recei$ed ettin" slips from other employees and made payoffs# The painter’s su se.uent threatenin" phone call to the tipster earned him a further char"e of conduct un ecomin" a &ederal employee# :1 C#&#A# M 10205:#389 for ids all persons enterin" in or on &ederal property from participatin" in "ames for money or other personal property' operatin" "am lin" de$ices' conductin" a lottery or pool' or sellin" or purchasin" num ers tic+ets#

!ift 7iolations
Samplin' of !ift Not Sufficient
( Jieutenant Colonel committed dereliction of duty !hen' in $iolation of the J=A' he recei$ed a ottle of -allantines 30 year0old Scotch $alued at @:00 and failed to report it and properly dispose of it# 2n lieu of a court martial' the colonel resi"ned from the military ser$ice for the "ood of the ser$ice under other than honora le conditions#

-ike a Pri ate )elicopter %ide to @orkG )o, About a &odel ShipG
The FactsE (ccordin" to s!orn testimony and documentation ac.uired y the office of a military ser$ice 2nspector General' a senior military officer accepted "ifts from the o!ner of a corporation that ser$iced and pro$ided landin" facilities for military aircraft# The "ifts to the officer included a helicopter ride to !or+' a shirt !ith the corporation’s lo"o' a miniature model airplane' meals at a Christmas party' and a leather *ac+et# The officer alle"edly returned the *ac+et ut did nothin" to compensate for receipt of the other "ifts' the $alue of !hich e%ceeded 4and pro a ly !ell e%ceeded6 @100# This conduct occurred as one of a series of alle"ed offenses that resulted in the officer ein" relie$ed of command' issued a puniti$e letter of reprimand' and ordered to forfeit @1000#


The -a,E 9 C#&#A# M 2739#1014 641:6 420036 re.uires all &ederal employees to a$oid any actions that a reasona le person' !ho +ne! the rele$ant facts' could ta+e to e a $iolation of the la!Cincludin" the prohi ition on pro$idin" >preferential treatment to any pri$ate or"ani;ation or indi$idual'? mentioned at M 2739#1014 64E6# 2n this case' the $alue of the "ifts the officer accepted could ma+e it appear that he mi"ht influence Go$ernment contractin" in fa$or of the corporation# To e sure' he en*oyed some neat "iftsCfor a time# Bo!e$erG >)u lic ser$ice is a pu lic trust'? and it re.uires that &ederal employees place loyalty to >the la!s and ethical principles a o$e pri$ate "ain? 4M 2739#1014 64166# =$en more directly on point' 9 C#&#A# MM 2739#2024a6 and 2739#2034d6 apply the "eneral principles mentioned a o$e y prohi itin" &ederal employees from 4amon" other thin"s6 solicitin" "ifts or acceptin" "iftsC!hether solicited or notCfrom any person !ho >SdToes usiness or see+s to do usiness !ith the employee’s a"ency#? There are some e%ceptions to these rules# 9 C#&#A# M 2739#20:' for e%ample' allo!s the acceptance of >unsolicited "ifts ha$in" an a""re"ate mar+et $alue of @20 or less per source per occasion'? pro$ided that the $alue of "ifts accepted under the >@20 rule? from a sin"le source do not amount to more than @90 in a "i$en calendar year# 2n the case a o$e' the officer’s "ifts e%ceeded 4and pro a ly !ell e%ceeded6 this limit# 2f you ha$e recei$ed a "ift or "ifts and anticipate that it has put you in *eopardy of $iolatin" these' or any other' re"ulations' 9 C#&#A# M 2739#209 tells you !hat you must do C and that does not include co$erin" it o$er 4!hich mi"ht ma+e thin"s !orse6# &irst' if the "ift is an item and not an acti$ity li+e a helicopter ride' you may return it to the "i$er or pay the "i$er the fair mar+et $alue 4see su section 4a64166# 2f that is not practical' you may C >at the discretion of the employee’s super$isor or an a"ency ethics official? C donate the item to an appropriate charity' share the item !ith your office' or destroy the item 4see su 0section 4a64266# &or an acti$ity or e$ent' you o $iously can’t return the "ift' ut you can and must pay ac+ the "i$er the mar+et $alue of the "iftH simply "i$in" ac+ somethin" similar !ill not suffice 4see su 0section 4a64366# 2f an employee >on his o!n initiati$e' promptly complies !ith the re.uirements of this section? 4that is' M 2739#2096' and the "ift !as not solicited y the employee' then he or she !ill not e considered to ha$e improperly recei$ed that "ift#


3!reat dinner4 thanks for the tip(3
Just prior to a ma*or contract a!ard' a -ureau Director !ent out to dinner !ith one of the potential competitors at a s!an+y <ashin"ton restaurant# The !ine alone cost o$er @100 per ottle# Too ad the Director didnDt reali;e that a Washington Post reporter !as at the ne%t ta le# The story recei$ed front0pa"e co$era"e in the ne%t day’s Post# -y that afternoon' the Director announced that he had accepted a *o in pri$ate industry C a *o he couldnDt refuse 4!ith his father0in0la!6# The Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch 49 C#&#A# )art 27396 "enerally prohi it &ederal personnel from acceptin" "ifts 4includin" meals6 from persons !ho do usiness or see+ to do usiness !ith the employee’s a"ency#

*ne Party Too &any
The -i" -oss !as retirin" and his second0in0command called the secretary to as+ her to set up a retirement party# Be directed her to send a memo to the staff ad$isin" them of !hat they !ere e%pected to contri ute# She !as assi"ned paper plates' nap+ins' plastic utensils' and a paper ta lecloth# =$eryone' includin" the secretary' !as e%pected to contri ute @29 for food and "ifts# To the surprise of no one' the second0in0command !as selected as the ne! -i" -oss# )is ne! ranch chief called the secretary to ha$e her set up a FpromotionF party# The ranch chief’s memo to the staff ad$ised them of !hat they !ere e%pected to contri ute# &or the secretary' it !as once a"ain paper plates' nap+ins' plastic utensils and paper ta lecloth# =$eryone' includin" the secretary' !as a"ain e%pected to contri ute @29 for food and "ifts# To no one’s surprise' the ranch chief !as selected as the ne! second0in0command# )er senior analyst called the secretary and as+ed her to set up a FpromotionF party# # # The secretary contacted the =thics Office instead' !here disciplinary action !as initiated# Su part C of the Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch 49 C#&#A# 27396 esta lishes the rules for "ifts et!een employees# 2n "eneral an employee may not "i$e a "ift or ma+e a donation to a "ift to a superior# &urthermore' employees may not "enerally accept "ifts from other employees !ho recei$e less pay# There are certain e%ceptions' of course#


!ift from a Prohibited Source
(s a "esture of than+s' a retailer "a$e an (rmy soldier a riefcase after the soldier' usin" his Go$ernment credit card' had purchased office supplies from the retailer# The soldier accepted the riefcase in $iolation of the Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch 49 C#&#A# )art 27396' !hich "enerally an acceptance of "ifts y &ederal personnel from persons !ho do usiness or see+ to do usiness !ith the employee’s a"ency# (fter an in$esti"ation' the soldier returned the riefcase and !as counseled#

!ift from Subordinate %esults in %emo al
( Super$isory Contract Specialist at (ndre!s (ir &orce -ase !as terminated after it !as disco$ered that she had accepted a total of @2E20 from a su ordinate 4a su ordinate that the specialist had' in fact' personally hired6 on t!o occasions# Despite the specialist’s claims that she did not +no! that acceptin" the "ifts !as !ron"' an (dministrati$e Jud"e affirmed the termination of a 200year federal career# 9 C#&#A# )art 2739' the >Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch'? for ids employees from acceptin" "ifts from lesser0paid employees unless 416 the employees are not in a su ordinate0superior relationship' and 426 there is a personal relationship et!een the t!o employees that !ould *ustify the "ift#

Employee Cited for Improperly Acceptin' Pharmaceutical Samples
The Department of ,eterans (ffairs 4,(6 conducted an in$esti"ation after it found that an employee at the ,( /edical Center at Chillicothe' Ohio' had misused his position and improperly solicited and accepted pharmaceutical dru" samples# Upon .uestionin"' the employee ac+no!led"ed acceptin" fi$e different medications from representati$es of four pharmaceutical companies' "ifts totalin" appro%imately @700# The pharmaceutical representati$e re.uired a physician to si"n for the samples# <hile a physician did indeed si"n off' he testified that he only did so due to pressure from the employee# The in$esti"ation unco$ered a"ency0!ide confusion re"ardin" the acceptance of dru" samples# &ederal "ift rules prohi it an employee from acceptin" or solicitin" a "ift from a person doin" usiness !ith the employee’s a"ency# (n employee may accept unsolicited E9

"ifts ha$in" a mar+et $alue of @20 or less per occasion' pro$ided that the a""re"ate mar+et $alue of indi$idual "ifts from any one person does not e%ceed @90 in a calendar year# There is no e%ception' ho!e$er' that allo!s for the acceptance of solicited "ifts# 2n response to the a"ency0!ide pro lem identified in the in$esti"ation' ,( officials issued a statement e%plainin" the application of the &ederal "ift rules to the acceptance of pharmaceutical samples' and de$eloped a fact sheet for a"ency employees !ith specific "uidance#

In ol ement in Claims A'ainst the !o ernment or in &atters Affectin' the !o ernment 8#9 .(S(C( : $;I"Type 7iolations<
Don+t Play Attorney A'ainst 0our Federal Employer6
The FactsE 2n the >off0time? from her !or+ !ith the Social Security (dministration' a senior attorney opened her o!n le"al practice and represented clients !ith claims a"ainst that $ery same (dministration# &or her dou le0duty' she !as sued y a U#S# (ttorney and ended up a"reein" to a settlement that re.uired her to pay the United States @113'000 for this and other $iolationsCnot a typical attorney’s feeN 4SourceG Office of Go$ernment =thics memorandum' Oct# 2002#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 209 420036 for ids any current &ederal employee from actin" as an attorney in prosecutin" a claim a"ainst the United StatesC!here this is not performed as part of his or her official duties for the &ederal Go$ernment# &or any such $iolation' the la! authori;es fines and possi le imprisonmentCof not more than one year' unless the conduct is >!illful'? in !hich case it can e for up to 9 years 4see 1E U#S#C# M 2174a66#

Department of 5ustice Attorney Sentenced for T,o Felony Counts
( hi"h0ran+in" attorney for the Department of Justice !as con$icted of representin" a pri$ate party efore a &ederal ("ency in a matter in !hich the U#S# !as a party in interest' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 209# Be !as also con$icted of theft of Go$ernment property' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 7:l# The attorney represented Kati$e (mericans efore the Department of the 2nterior in pri$ate liti"ation' and su mitted false


tra$el $ouchers for Go$ernment reim ursement !hile he ser$ed as an employee of the Department of Justice# The attorney pleaded "uilty and !as sentenced to four months of home detention and one year of pro ation# The plea a"reement also stipulated that the attorney pay restitution to Department of Justice in the amount of @9'000' pay a @9'000 fine' and pay appro%imately @2'900 in pro ation costs# Section 209 prohi its &ederal personnel from representin" anyone efore a &ederal ("ency or court in connection !ith a particular matter in !hich the United States has a direct and su stantial interest#

Air Force Ci ilian Employee Improperly %epresents Fello, Employees Before .(S( !o ernment
( ci$ilian employee of the O+lahoma City' (ir Jo"istics Center 4OC0(JC6' !ho !as also the former OC0(JC shop ste!ard' !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 209# The employee' !ho !as not an attorney' o!ned a pri$ate company called (ssociated Ja or Consultants# This company pro$ided le"al ser$ices to other OC0(JC ci$ilian employees y filin" le"al riefs on ehalf of the ci$ilian employees and y representin" them efore $arious oard hearin"s a"ainst the United States# The employee collected appro%imately @1'090 in fees from OC0(JC ci$ilian employees for his ser$ices' and had illed out ut had not collected an additional @1'E93# The (ir &orce employee !as char"ed !ith a ci$il $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 209# The case !as dismissed !ithout pre*udice# On &e ruary 2' 188E' the parties entered into a stipulated a"reement in !hich the accused a"reed to pay the United States @3'000 and to refrain from ad$isin"' counselin"' or representin" persons !ith claims a"ainst the United States#

FAA Employee Improperly %epresents Co",orker Before Department of 5ustice
(n en"ineer employed y the &ederal ($iation (dministration 4&((6 at the /i+e /oroney (eronautical Center in O+lahoma City !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 209 4amon" other char"es6# <hile employed y the &((' the en"ineer attended and "raduated from ni"ht la! school# The ne! attorney continued his employment as an en"ineer ut prepared !ills' po!ers of attorney' and other le"al documents on his o!n


time# <ithout permission from the &((' he a"reed to represent a fello! &(( employee !ho !as the tar"et of a criminal in$esti"ation y the U#S# (ttorneyDs Office' and su se.uently contacted the U#S# (ttorneyDs Office on ehalf of his client# The United States rou"ht a ci$il action a"ainst the &(( employee pursuant to 1E U#S#C# 2094a6426 and 1E U#S#C# 217# The parties entered into a consent *ud"ment in !hich the &(( employee a"reed to pay a @1'200 penalty#

Deputy Secretary of Commerce Improperly Contacts *fficial at Department of 7eterans Affairs
The Deputy Secretary of Commerce recei$ed from his father0in0la!' the o!ner of a company doin" usiness !ith the Department of ,eterans (ffairs 4,(6' a letter complainin" of delays e%perienced y the company in modifyin" its contract !ith the ,(# The Deputy Secretary of Commerce referred the letter to his counterpart at the ,( on ehalf of his father0in0la!' and also contacted the ,( y telephone# (s a result of the inter$ention' the company recei$ed the modification it sou"ht more .uic+ly than it !ould ha$e' a sent the action y the Deputy Secretary# ( complaint for ci$il penalties !as filed pursuant to 1E U#S#C# 2174 6 for a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 209# The Deputy Secretary a"reed to a ci$il settlement' includin" a @9'000 fine' !hich !ould ha$e een the ma%imum fine a$aila le under the sentencin" "uidelines had the case een prosecuted criminally# Section 209 prohi its &ederal personnel' other than in the proper dischar"e of their official duties' from actin" as an a"ent or attorney for another efore any &ederal a"ency or court' in connection !ith a particular matter in !hich the United States is a party or has a direct and su stantial interest#

7A Employee %epresents Company Before .(S(A(I(D(
(n architect employed y the Department of ,eterans (ffairs 4,(6 !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 209# <hile employed y ,(' the architect represented a -elts$ille' /aryland' company in connection !ith an application for a contract !ith the United States ("ency for 2nternational De$elopment in Dacca' -an"ladesh# The architect made t!o trips to -an"ladesh to represent the company !hile employed y the ,(' includin" a trip for !hich the company paid him @2'080# )rior to the effecti$e date of his EE

resi"nation from the ,(' the architect !as paid an additional @9'703 y the company# Durin" this same period of dual employment' he earned @9'9:0 from the ,(# The architect !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2094a6426# Be !as sentenced to t!o years pro ation' 100 hours of community ser$ice' and !as re.uired to pay a fine of @1'000# Section 209 prohi its &ederal personnel' other than in the proper dischar"e of their official duties' from actin" as an a"ent or attorney for another efore any &ederal a"ency or court' in connection !ith a particular matter in !hich the United States is a party or has a direct and su stantial interest#

&isuse of !o ernment %esources and Personnel
I @asn+t %eally /Dri in'2 *fficer>
(n army employee decided to dri$e some co0!or+ers home after a ni"ht of drin+in"# Unfortunately' the dri$er had also ta+en part in the merriment and used a "o$ernment $ehicle# This led to the dri$er runnin" his $ehicle a"round on top of a sand ar' strandin" himself and his passen"ers# The dri$er offered t!o unidentified indi$iduals a ride in his "o$ernment $ehicle if they helped free the $ehicle from the sand pile# -efore they !ere a le to free the $ehicle' police officers arri$ed on the scene and arrested the dri$er# The Go$ernment $ehicle !as impounded the &ederal employee !as char"ed !ith Aefusal to Su mit to a Chemical Test and Dri$in" Under the 2nfluence' and *ailed for 10 days# The employee failed to inform his super$isor a out the incident includin" !here he !as for the 10 days he !as in *ail# The employee plead "uilty in state court to Aefusal of a -reath Test and !as su se.uently remo$ed from federal ser$ice for dri$in" under the influence' misuse of a "o$ernment $ehicle' loss of dri$er’s license' and attemptin" to decei$e his super$isor#

Pointin' and Shootin' for Personal !ain
(n O09 in communications decided that his day *o !asn’t enou"h' so he started a side usiness photo"raphin" local sports e$ents# <hile on duty' he as+ed a su ordinate to create photo products for his personal usiness durin" official time# The officer also re.uested a press pass on ehalf of the Defense /edia (cti$ity' !hich he then used to


"ain e%clusi$e entry into sportin" e$ents to ta+e pictures in his off0duty time# <hen he !as finally cau"ht for misusin" the press pass' he recei$ed a letter of concern from command#

)ors D+oeu res and @ine>*n the TaDpayers+ Dime
( mem er of the Senior =%ecuti$e Ser$ice authori;ed the use of appropriated funds for t!o optional' off0site >team uildin"? e$entsG a !ine tastin" e$ent and a hors dDoeu$res tastin" e$ent# The S=S mem er ar"ued that these e$ents !ere *ustified as >necessary team uildin"? e$ents# 2t turns out that the e$ents !ere not so >necessary? after allG no employees !ere actually re.uired to attend the e$ents' !hich too+ place off0 site# The 2nspector General found that the S=S had improperly authori;ed the use of appropriated funds for these e$ents' !hich !ere not necessary# She !as counseled y her superiors as a result#

A Personal Postal Ser ice
One audacious officer stationed in (f"hanistan de$eloped a lo$e for fancy ru"s and shot"uns produced in Tur+ey# Be li+ed them so much' in fact' that he created his o!n courier ser$ice to "et e%tra cash from the U#S# to increase his collection# The officer' an O09' su mitted a fraudulent courier order' !hich re.uested that an enlisted ser$ice0 mem er personally transport an >important pac+a"e? from the U#S# to (f"hanistan# The enlisted ser$ice0mem er e$en recei$ed preferred seatin" on a "o$ernment fli"ht to underta+e his >special? tas+# <hen the enlisted ser$ice0mem er arri$ed in (f"hanistan' the O09 told him that the >important pac+a"e? actually contained @:'000 in cash for the purchase of more ru"s and shot"uns# The O09 needed the money to reim urse people from !hom he had orro!ed funds to purchase ru"s and "uns' and to uy more of these items for his family and friends# The enlisted ser$ice0mem er then sat around on the ase for 10 days on his courier orders# <hen inter$ie!ed' he stated that he had recei$ed no assi"nments on ase' and spent those 10 days !atchin" mo$ies' eatin" meals' and doin" no !or+# <hen the command "ot !ind of this misuse of funds and personnel' the O09 !as relie$ed of his duties and forced to fully reim urse the "o$ernment for thousands of dollars#


If the !lo es Fit4 No Need to AcHuit
( Ser$ice KCO admitted to stealin" "o$ernment property !hile performin" duties as a security police officer at a ase in the United States# The KCO !as o ser$ed remo$in" uniform items' fli"ht "lo$es' and flashli"hts from an unsecured supply uildin" !hile ma+in" his security rounds# On another occasion the KCO too+ self0inflatin" air mattresses and mess +its from the same uildin"# The "uard used his police $ehicle to stash the stolen "oods' efore ta+in" them home# The KCO admitted to stealin" the items' and !as forced to ta+e an early retirement#

It+s Fi e *+clock Some,here
( "o$ernment employee attached to a Ser$ice ase in the United States ended up ta+in" a permanent $acation after a pattern of !or+in" an a re$iated !or+ !ee+# The in$esti"ation sho!ed the employee !or+ed an a$era"e of three hours a day' efore lea$in" around nine or ten each mornin" to spend the rest of the day drin+in" at a local ar# The employee put in for retirement in lieu of disciplinary action

.n"Captain"like Beha ior
( Ser$ice Captain lost his command for a usin" his position' committin" larceny' and acceptin" "ifts# The Captain coerced the ship’s /<A committee to purchase his personal items' for cash' to use as pri;es in a command "olf tournament# Durin" port $isits' he used his position to mandate compulsory !ardroom attendance to sales e$ents he orchestrated !ith specific $endors' in e%chan"e for discounts and free merchandise for himself# (t a an.uet !ith an ally military command' the Captain $entured into the other military’s (dmiral’s /ess and remo$ed a pair of ceremonial salt and pepper sha+ers# -ac+ in port' he accepted a helicopter ta%i ser$ice and a free round of "olf from a non0 federal entity in e%chan"e for ein" a "uest spea+er' a $iolation of 9 C#&#A# 2739#202R203R20: 4Gifts from Outside Sources6# The Captain !as relie$ed of his command#

/I ,as do=in' off O not sleepin'62
( Go$ernment employee !as reported y his co0!or+ers for sleepin" on the *o # <hen confronted' he admitted that he may ha$e do;ed off a time or t!o' ut ne$er


actually slept at !or+# Bis three day suspension !as reduced to one day after he re$ealed that dro!siness !as a potential side0effect of his prescri ed medication#

!o Speedracer
( ci$ilian reported seein" three Go$ernment $ehicles tra$elin" at hi"h speeds' tail"atin" and !ea$in" throu"h traffic in a dan"erous manner# <hen .uestioned' se$eral ser$ice mem ers admitted to dri$in" in e%cess of the speed limit' passin" on the ri"ht and dri$in" a""ressi$ely# T!o of them !ere "i$en formal counselin" on the proper use of Go$ernment property and the third !as "i$en a non0puniti$e Jetter of 2nstruction#

!o ernment Parkin'
The 2nspector General recei$ed a report that an officer had een usin" a Go$ernment $ehicle par+in" pass to par+ his personal $ehicle !hile he !as at !or+# The report indicated that on se$eral occasions other employees !ere forced to pay for par+in" a Go$ernment $ehicle ecause the officer’s personal $ehicle !as usin" the par+in" pass# The su se.uent in$esti"ation re$ealed that the officer had een usin" the pass for par+in" his personal $ehicle' and that his superior officers had not een informed or "i$en him permission to do so# (lthou"h the officer ad$ised that he only used the pass !hen "oin" to !or+' and did not use it !hen he elie$ed a Go$ernment $ehicle !ould need it' he recei$ed a letter of counselin"#

!o ernment Property for Sale
The Go$ernment recei$ed reports that a military reser$ist !as attemptin" to sell Go$ernment property' includin" military ac+pac+s and oots' to ci$ilian employees at a steep discount# The reports seemed to indicate that the reser$ist had access to a "reat selection of military e.uipment ecause he ad$ertised that he could supply oots in any si;e that his fello! employees mi"ht need# 2n$esti"ation disco$ered more than @3'000 !orth of Go$ernment property in the reser$ist’s home# Be recei$ed $er al counselin" for his misuse of Go$ernment resources#


Personal Phone Calls
( ci$ilian employee recei$ed a letter of reprimand for her e%cessi$e use of her Go$ernment telephones for personal calls# The employee had een !arned a out the issue efore' and an in$esti"ation re$ealed that she had spent appro%imately t!enty0one hours of duty time on personal telephone calls to her friends and family o$er a fi$e month span#

Employee %ecei es %eprimand for )is Side Business
( ci$ilian employee !as reported for runnin" a side usiness throu"h his office# 2t turns out that the employee had de$eloped a computer pro"ram durin" duty hours and on Go$ernment e.uipment# Be then mar+eted the pro"ram' and his consultin" ser$ices' $ia the internet# Be also used his Go$ernment ()O address as his usiness address so that he !ould e a le to handle all of his personal usiness at his Go$ernment office# The employee recei$ed a letter of reprimand and !as forced to stop sellin" the soft!are# Since it !as de$eloped on Go$ernment time and usin" Go$ernment resources the pro"ram !as deemed Go$ernment property#

Takin' the Blackha,k *ut for -unch
( concerned citi;en contacted the 2nspector General after seein" a -lac+ha!+ helicopter par+ed in a field ehind a restaurant# 2nside' he found fi$e ser$ice mem ers that had stopped for lunch and !ere en*oyin" their meal !ith se$eral ci$ilians# (n in$esti"ation re$ealed that the soldiers !ere on a trainin" mission' ut they had properly listed the restaurant stop in their mission plan# Since the stop !as properly listed' the soldiers had not $iolated any re"ulations' ut they still recei$ed $er al counselin" ecause their actions created an appearance of impropriety#

.n,elcomed @histleblo,ers
( military ser$ice Captain denied reenlistment to a Staff Ser"eant on the asis of a protected communication# The denial !as ased in part on con"ressional in.uiries the Staff Ser"eant had filed concernin" actions of military officials# The denial $iolated 1E U#S#C# 103:' !hich prohi its reprisal a"ainst a military mem er for ma+in" a protected communication# The Captain !as issued a letter of counselin"#


2n a similar case' a Captain issued an ad$erse fitness report after an =nsi"n had alle"ed that she had een se%ually assaulted y another military ser$ice mem er# The =nsi"n had her record corrected after !histle lo!er reprisal !as found under 10 U#S#C# 103:#

Better Call .")aul Instead
( military ser$ice officer used t!o "o$ernment o!ned $ehicles to mo$e her elon"in"s from one residence to another# The use of the $ehicles' totalin" o$er 290 miles' earned her a memorandum of reprimand from her commander for misuse of "o$ernment $ehicles# (nother officer !as issued a memorandum of counselin" for improperly authori;in" the use of the $ehicles# 2n a similar case' a military ser$ice Colonel authori;ed a su ordinate to use a military $ehicle to pic+ him up at his residence and ta+e him to !or+# Be !as counseled for improperly usin" &ederal Go$ernment resources' includin" personnel and e.uipment' for a non0official purpose' in $iolation of J=A 20301' Use of &ederal Go$ernment Aesources# @130 !as collected from the Colonel to reim urse the "o$ernment for the milea"e cost incurred#

Chiefly @asteful
( chief of maintenance and lo"istics at a military facility purchased' at a cost of @30'000 each' 7 for+lifts desi"ned for inside use despite the fact that the command needed lifts for outside use' e$en for use in inclement !eather# The for+lifts rusted for E months in an outdoor stora"e area# 2n an e$en more impressi$e display of !aste' the chief purchased a @:00'000 patrol oat !ith a ad "enerator that left the oat inoperati$e 0 and that !ent unrepaired# The chief’s actions $iolated &ederal (c.uisition Ae"ulation 3#10101' !hich sets forth the standard that transactions related to the e%penditure of pu lic funds re.uire the hi"hest de"ree of pu lic trust and an impecca le standard of conduct# The chief !as remo$ed from his position#

*n"Duty Classes


T!o /ilitary Ser"eants &irst Class !ere handed memorandums of admonition for lac+ of "ood *ud"ment for improperly usin" Tuition (ssistance# They attended school durin" on0duty time !hen they should normally ha$e performed their military duties# Their ci$ilian super$isor !as also "i$en a memorandum of admonition for improperly allo!in" the soldiers to ta+e such time#

Si'nificant Penalties for Si'nificant @ron'doin'
( former employee at the K(S( (mes Aesearch Center' Christopher -urt <iltsee' !as sentenced to fi$e years in prison and ordered to pay a @29'000 fine after pleadin" "uilty to possessin" child porno"raphy on his "o$ernment computer# <iltsee admitted to possessin" more than 700 ima"es# Be is at least the third person connected !ith K(S( (mes to e con$icted of possessin" child porno"raphy# (nother former K(S( employee' /ar+ Charles Velins+y' li+e!ise pled "uilty to possessin" more than 700 ima"es on his "o$ernment computer# Velins+y recei$ed three years in prison#

Sa e 0our 5obP Pay ,ith 80our *,n< Cash
( former mana"er at the U#S# )ostal Ser$ice !as remo$ed from his position for' amon" other thin"s' improperly usin" his "o$ernment credit card and ma+in" false statements durin" the in$esti"ation re"ardin" that use# <illiam Bic+mon !as found to ha$e made personal purchases on his )ostal Ser$ice tra$el credit card that totaled o$er @:90# The char"es included fi$e "as station char"es and an 110day car rental char"e# Thou"h he e$entually paid the char"es' the improper use !as a factor in his e$entual remo$al#

Colonel Finds It+s Too -ate to Turn Back Time on .nethical %eHuest
(n (rmy Colonel !as scheduled to "o TDP and as+ed one of her contract employees to ma+e a reser$ation for her mother on the same fli"ht# <hen she !as told that such action !ould e ille"al' she responded that it !as >alri"ht? and that she had as+ed him as a >personal fa$or#? (fter e$en more people counseled her on the ille"ality of her actions' the Colonel attempted to stop the employee from ma+in" the fli"ht reser$ation' ut it !as too late# She !as found to ha$e $iolated )ara"raphs 20301 and 30 309 of DoD 9900#50A' Joint =thics Ae"ulation' !hich prohi it use of &ederal 89

Go$ernment resources' includin" personnel and e.uipment' for other than official purposes#

Cyber"Sa y Teacher -earns a -esson
( ci$ilian teacher employed !ith DoD in Japan !as cau"ht usin" his Go$ernment computer to send fre.uent messa"es on /ySpace' Pahoo Chat' and /SK chat durin" duty hours# Be also used the computer to oth $ie! and send porno"raphic material# Students reported that instead of teachin" classes he spent most of his time chattin" !ith his "irlfriend and family in the United States# (d$erse )ersonnel (ction !as ta+en a"ainst the teacher and he resi"ned#

&a?orly *ut To -unch
(n (rmy /a*or !as scheduled to !or+ 0530 to 1700 hours# 2nstead' he !ould sho! up as late as 1030 and lea$e as early as 1200# Someho!' durin" his short stay at the office he also mana"ed to ta+e >e%cessi$e lunch time#? Be !as su *ected to counselin" for his time and attendance $iolations#

Pro'nosis for Army Doctor Does Not -ook !ood
( ci$ilian doctor !or+in" at an (rmy clinic !as cau"ht orderin" medication and tests for herself at the clinic e$en thou"h she !as not entitled to medical care y the military# She had also een seen y occupational health pro$iders at the clinic a out 20 times# This doctor recei$in" unauthori;ed medical care !as suspended for t!o !ee+s !ithout pay and retrained on her eli"i ility to recei$e medical ser$ices#

At Today+s !as Prices4 Better %efill the !o ernment+s Tank6
( "roup of interns used a Go$ernment rental $ehicle to attend a 90day Defense (c.uisition Uni$ersity 4D(U6 class in (la ama# Bo!e$er' after the class !as o$er they decided to dri$e to Kash$ille for a little !ee+end $acation' ultimately droppin" the car off !ith an empty tan+ of "as# They char"ed the Go$ernment an e%tra t!o days for the !ee+end car rental and the @9R"allon "as refill# They !ere also improperly paid for an e%tra day of per diem durin" their oondo""le to /usic City# The ori"inal $ouchers claimed days that !ere not part of the interns’ official TDP' ut !ere su se.uently


corrected# The intern "roup !as counseled' recei$ed trainin" on filin" tra$el $ouchers' and !as made to contact D&(S re"ardin" reim ursement to the Go$ernment for the improper e%penditures#

A S,in' and a &iss for Senior *fficers .sin' !o ernment Funds on !olf *utin'
&our senior officials' includin" t!o (ir &orce Generals' a /arine General' and a Ka$y (dmiral' !ith staff personnel e%tended their official TDP y an e%tra day in order to attend a "olf outin" follo!in" a formal conference in To+yo# They utili;ed Go$ernment transportation and recei$ed per diem for the tournament# There !ere no usiness e$ents that day' and the all0day "olf e$ent !as attended y less than half of the conference participants# (ttendance at the "olf e$ent' costin" the Go$ernment appro%imately an additional @3'000' could not reasona ly e considered to e official Go$ernment usiness# Golf foursomes do not pro$ide the opportunity to dialo"ue !ith a lar"e or di$erse "roup of people and thus do not "reatly foster communication et!een conference participants# The &ederal Joint Tra$el Ae"ulations re.uire that official tra$el only e authori;ed as necessary >to accomplish the mission of the Go$ernment effecti$ely and economically#? The "olf did not further any le"itimate Go$ernment purpose' nor !as it an economical choice# The senior officials $iolated the Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch 49 C#&#A# )art 2739#50: and 2739#5096 y misusin" Go$ernment property and time# They !ere directed to reim urse the Go$ernment for oth the lod"in" and per diem costs incurred due to the "olf outin"#

Not a -iar4 But the Army Still Can+t Train 0our FiancQe+s Son to Fi'ht Fire
The &ire Chief at an army installation did not ha$e enou"h students to fill a pre0 paid' DoD0funded (irfield Aescue &ire &i"hter Class so he sent his fiancWe’s son to the trainin" to fill one of the unused seats# (lthou"h he !as not a DoD employee and did not possess any pre$ious firefi"hter trainin" or e%perience' he !as issued Depot firefi"htin" e.uipment and sent to the trainin"# This action posed a considera le safety ris+ to all in$ol$ed and $iolated the class’s safety re.uirements# The &ire Chief !as not suspected of fraud' only poor *ud"ment# =$en thou"h sendin" the oy did not in$ol$e the


e%penditure of additional funds' he still $iolated )ara"raph 20301 of DoD 9900#50A' the Joint =thics Ae"ulation' para"raph 20301' in his misuse of Go$ernment resources y issuin" the oy the Go$ernment e.uipment# The &ire Chief !as issued a !ritten reprimand to e made a matter of record in his official personnel folder for a period not to e%ceed t!o years from the date of receipt#

Staff Ser'eant Tricks *ut )is %ide on the !o ernment+s Dime
(n (rmy =07 assi"ned to a Kational Guard maintenance shop improperly !or+ed on ci$ilian $ehicles at the shop and remo$ed car parts for his personal use# Be installed truc+ tires' t!o solar"i;ers and other accessories on his personal $ehicle and used his Go$ernment credit card to uy a diamond plate fuel tan+ and install it in his o!n truc+ !hile puttin" a re"ular !hite fuel tan+ in the military truc+ he !as !or+in" on# The Staff Ser"eant not only too+ a Go$ernment $ehicle for his personal use' ut he e$en too+ a shed from the shop and mo$ed it to his home# Be !as also suspected of usin" his Go$ernment credit card to pay for "as for his personal $ehicles# The Staff Ser"eant !as char"ed !ith larceny and !ron"ful appropriation under the Code of /ilitary Justice and the Go$ernment !as a le to reco$er @E'E00 in property#

&isuse of Position
( /a*or General and commander in a military ser$ice a used his authority y arran"in" to ha$e an enlisted mem er ser$e as his unauthori;ed enlisted aide# Pears earlier' a re$ie! of enlisted aide positions eliminated the illet at his center# Despite this' the /a*or General desired the ser$ices of an enlisted aide to assist in official entertainin" and improperly assi"ned enlisted aide duties to a non0commissioned officer# The /a*or General !as issued a letter of counselin"#

-a, Enforcement *fficial Fired for -andin' !o ernment )elicopter at )is Dau'hter+s School
( Department of Bomeland Security order officer !as fired for misuse of "o$ernment property after he fle! a multi0million dollar DBS helicopter to his dau"hter’s elementary school and landed it on school property# The incident pro$o+ed complaints from parents and attracted media attention# (lthou"h the employee’s immediate


super$isor told him he could use the helicopter' the employee’s actions !ere not e%cused ecause employees are e%pected to use their o!n *ud"ment and should not rely solely on the *ud"ment of their superiors !hen it comes to ethical conduct#

$M"0ear 7eteran of the 7A -oses 5ob * er Dirty Emails
( Department of ,eterans (ffairs ud"et analyst 4GS0116 !as terminated for the inappropriate use of a "o$ernment computer system# The employee sent and recei$ed at least 118 e0mail messa"es containin" se%ually e%plicit material# The employee had een instructed in the proper use of "o$ernment computers and si"ned a statement that he !as a!are of the a"ency’s policies' !hich !ere clearly $iolated y the contents of his e0mail messa"es# The employee’s claims that someone else "ot onto his computer and sent and recei$ed the e0mails !ere una$ailin"#

Don+t -ose 0our Day 5ob
( Treasury Department computer specialist used "o$ernment 2nternet and telephone ser$ice to operate a pri$ate usiness durin" !or+ hours for se$eral years# The a"ency estimated that he stole o$er @73'000 in salary y runnin" his pri$ate usiness on "o$ernment time# (fter he !as issued a cease and desist order' he discontinued most of his pri$ate usiness acti$ity' ut he admitted to continuin" to use his !or+ computer to transfer files relatin" to his pri$ate usiness# Be ar"ued that this !as allo!ed y the Department ecause employees are permitted de minimis 4$ery limited6 personal use of "o$ernment property# The Department disa"reed# (lthou"h Department employees may use "o$ernment property for personal purposes at a de minimis le$el' they may not use "o$ernment property at all to pursue pri$ate commercial usiness acti$ities or profit0 ma+in" $entures# This employee had een !arned once and continued to use the "o$ernment’s office e.uipment for his pri$ate usiness# Thus' this employee !as left !ith only his ni"ht *o 4!hich he could no! le"itimately do durin" the day6#

).D Employee Discloses Non"Public Information to -o er for Personal Financial !ain
( BUD employee "a$e her spouse0li+e partner information a out the minimum accepta le id re.uired to purchase a BUD0o!ned property# This information !as non0


pu lic and "a$e the employee’s partner a si"nificant ad$anta"e o$er other idders in "ettin" the !innin" id# (fter the her partner !on the id and purchased the property' the property !as transferred to the employee for @1Can o $ious stra!0man transaction used to "et around a BUD re"ulation prohi itin" BUD employees from iddin" on BUD0 o!ned properties# &ederal re"ulations prohi it employees from usin" non0pu lic information for furtherin" their o!n pri$ate financial interests' or the pri$ate financial interests of others# The BUD employee !as fired#

Block Party for Ne, Staff &embers Not a /)ail and Fare,ell2
( Colonel in <ur; ur"' Germany dre! the attention of in$esti"ators after they disco$ered that he had used Go$ernment resources to host an unofficial ar e.ue at his .uarters# The Colonel had planned a loc+ party to !elcome ne! staff mem ers to his di$ision' and accepted an offer y a superior officer to use Go$ernment property and soldiers for the party# Be su se.uently tas+ed soldiers from his command durin" duty hours to purchase food and e$era"es 4!ith his o!n pri$ate funds6 as !ell as transport and set up a Go$ernment tent and Go$ernment0purchased ta les and enches at his .uarters# The soldiers used Go$ernment $ehicles to transport the party supplies' and returned to rea+ do!n the tent and ta les at the close of the party# <hile the Colonel protested that the e$ent !as a Bail and &are!ell' the e$ent !as ad$ertised to the community as a -loc+ )arty' attendance !as $oluntary' and the e$ent !as not considered a place of duty# Thus' in$esti"ators determined that the e$ent !as unofficial' and resulted in the misuse of "o$ernment resources#

Personal .se of !o ernment Property Earns %eprimand
The (ssistant &ire Chief at a military installation in California recei$ed a letter of reprimand after in$esti"ators disco$ered that he had improperly authori;ed a firefi"hter to ta+e home a rarely0used fire station pool ta le for personal use# The (ssistant Chief had een instructed to determine !hether the pool ta le !as actually Go$ernment property efore "iftin" it to the firefi"hter' ut had ne"lected to do so# Ta+in" a >cue? from the Chief’s admission to in$esti"ators' the firefi"hter returned the pool ta le to the station and recei$ed counselin"#


Admiral .nder In esti'ation for .se of Staff to Support Personal Tra el
(n (dmiral’s case !as referred to the Chief of Ka$al Operations after in$esti"ators learned that he had used his personal staff to oo+ family tra$el and "i$e him rides home from !or+# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered that the (dmiral’s =%ecuti$e (ssistant' (ide' and &la" <riter had on multiple occasions acceded to the (dmiral’s re.uests to help plan and oo+ family $acations# The (dmiral’s staff had also oo+ed personal tra$el for the (dmiral’s family mem ers to *oin him on official usiness# 2n$esti"ators further found that the (dmiral had improperly dri$en home his Go$ernment $ehicle on se$eral occasions' and that the staff had de$eloped a custom that the last person to lea$e the office on a day on !hich the (dmiral lac+ed transportation !as $irtually o li"ated to "i$e the (dmiral a ride home in their personal $ehicle# The (dmiral’s case !as referred to the Chief of Ka$al Operations for misuse of personnel' misuse of Go$ernment property' and receipt of "ifts from su ordinates#

Stoppin' at the Base Eatery Not an /*fficial 7isit2
( Kon0(ppropriated &und (cti$ity 4K(&26 employee !as reprimanded after it !as disco$ered that he dro$e his official Go$ernment $ehicle e$ery mornin" to a K(&2 eatery for coffee and rea+fast# The employee readily admitted his actions' ut indicated that he elie$ed them to e proper ecause they !ere >official $isits? to an acti$ity under his command# Be noted that he had formerly used his personal $ehicle for all such $isits' ut !ith risin" "as prices' that practice had ecome too e%pensi$e# Be further hypothesi;ed that the person !ho had tipped off in$esti"ators !as simply *ealous as they pro a ly did not ha$e a Go$ernment $ehicle and !ere forced to dri$e their personal $ehicle to "et food# The employee recei$ed a !ritten reprimand for usin" a Go$ernment $ehicle for non0authori;ed purposes#

&isuse of Culinary Specialists %esults in Attention of Chief of Na al *peration
(n (dmiral and Captain at a Ka$al &acility in Japan came under in$esti"ation !hen it !as disco$ered that they !ere usin" Culinary Specialists 4CSs6 to operate an


unauthori;ed &la" /ess# The t!o officers ordered the esta lishment of an on0shore &la" /ess to ser$e them !ithout follo!in" the proper procedures to recei$e appro$al# <hile they pro$ided the funds for the CSs to purchase the food for the mess' they re.uired that the CSs prepare meals and ser$e them in their respecti$e offices# The CSs !ere also directed to prepare food for an unofficial social e$ent "i$en y the (dmiral in his .uarters# (s a result of their misuse of personnel' the officers’ cases !ere for!arded to the Chief of Ka$al Operations#

Failure to Choose Cost"Efficient Fli'hts %esults in In esti'ation
(n (rmy Kational Guard Colonel found himself under in$esti"ation after the re$elation that he had committed !aste and a use in official tra$el# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered that o$er a three0year span of time' the Colonel had tra$eled on t!el$e fli"hts in usiness class' addin" appro%imately @7'E00 to the fli"ht costH had ta+en nineteen trips !ith non0contract carriersH had on si% occasions flo!n routes terminatin" in destinations not in his orders' such as San &ranciscoH and had re.uested that his staff oo+ him on a certain chain of carriers !hene$er possi le in order to earn fre.uent flyer miles# 2n$esti"ators determined that the failure of the Colonel and his staff to follo! the proper procedures concernin" tra$el cost comparisons cost nearly @9'000 in 2009 alone#

Trashin' .nused Parts !arners Employee Counselin'
( Ser"eant in the (ir Aefuelin" <in" of the (ri;ona Kational Guard had the responsi ility of properly catalo"in" e%cess aircraft parts# This process in$ol$ed fillin" out the re.uisite paper!or+ and o%in" loose items# The Ser"eant s!iftly ecame frustrated !ith the process' and decided to simply thro! the items a!ay# The Ser"eant’s shortcut earned him counselin" and a di$ision0!ide re$ie! of proper maintenance procedures#

Email Encoura'in' Attendance at &ilitary Association &eetin' Earns Counselin'
T!o senior officials of the Jouisiana Kational Guard !ere counseled after sendin" an email to a lar"e num er of ser"eant ma*ors in the command as+in" them to >focus on? the upcomin" con$ention of the Jouisiana (rmy Kational Guard =nlisted


(ssociation' notin" that they >e%pectSedT? attendance at certain sessions' and e%pressin" their desire for >a "ood turnout#? The email !as in $iolation of DoD Directi$e 9900#5A' !hich prohi its official endorsement of non0&ederal or"ani;ations# The t!o officers !ere counseled for their $iolations#

Don+t -et Internet Surfin' Carry 0ou A,ay6
The FactsE The 2nternal Ae$enue Ser$ice 42AS6 issued a policy that allo!ed the use of the 2nternet y employees for personal reasons so lon" as that use did not distract employees from their duties# 2t also pro$ided a list of 2nternet sites that !ere off0limits# Si% months later' the Treasury 2nspector General 42G6 for Ta% (dministration found !idespread a use of 2nternet pri$ile"es# ( uses included $ie!in" porno"raphic sites' do!nloadin" music and "ames' and >chattin"? online !ith friends# The 2G recommended that the 2AS re.uire employees to si"n a document declarin" that they understood 2AS 2nternet policy and' as Go$=%ec#com put it' >humiliate 2nternet a users y pu lishin" their names#? The 2AS has determined that it !ill ta+e stron"er measures# 4SourceG 7o5E@ec6com' June 23' 2003#6 The -a,E Different a"encies may ha$e different policies as to !hat use employees can ma+e of the 2nternet !hile at !or+# (s an employee' you must follo! the policies of your employer or face disciplinary action# /oralG Chec+ the tide in your office efore you surf#

.sin' !o ernment 7ehicle to /Chill2 Earns Do,n Time By Suspension
The FactsE ( resident of California !as pu;;led to find a Dod"e Aam truc+ o!ned y a ranch of the United States military often turnin" up in a residential nei"h orhood durin" usiness hours# Concerned at this use of a Go$ernment0o!ned $ehicle 4GO,6' the citi;en decided to "i$e a Defense Department Botline a call# (n in$esti"ation ensued' !hich in$ol$ed sur$eillance of the nei"h orhood in .uestion' re$ie! of time+eepin" records' and inter$ie!s# Ultimately' the dri$er of the $ehicleCa mechanic at a military facilityCadmitted to ha$in" pro lems !ith su stance a use and depression and to usin" the truc+ at times to return home alle"edly to retrie$e tools 4!hich could ha$e een o tained y other means6 and to >chill out'? sometimes for t!o 103

hours# Be admitted that he +ne! that !hat he !as doin" !ith the GO, !as !ron"' ut he as+ed for a second chance since he had ne$er een in trou le efore# The mechanic !as "i$en the mandatory minimum penaltyG a 300day suspension# The -a,E 31 U#S#C# M 13:84 6 re.uires that an officer or employee !ho >!illfully? uses a $ehicle o!ned or leased y the United States Go$ernment for other than official purposes e suspended for at least one month or' >!hen circumstances !arrant' for a lon"er period or summarily remo$ed from office#? 2n this case' the misuse of the $ehicle !as deemed to e !illful' since the &ederal employee +ne! that his personal use of the GO, !as !ron"#

)oliday !reetin's6 &ilitary *fficer Sent Best @ishes on the Cheap F 0ou Paid6
The FactsE (ccordin" to s!orn testimony and documents unco$ered y a military ser$ice 2nspector General in.uiry' a senior military officer and his !ife had a su ordinate ser$ice mem er print out on a Go$ernment office computer official cards containin" their holiday "reetin"s' !hich they then si"ned' enclosed in official en$elopes !ith printed la els' and sent to a out 100 addresses# Some of their "reetin"s !ere sent o$erseas to forei"n officials usin" Go$ernment posta"e and mar+ed >Official -usiness#? This conduct occurred as one of a series of alle"ed offenses that resulted in the officer ein" relie$ed of command' issued a puniti$e letter of reprimand' and ordered to forfeit @1'000# The -a,E 9 C#&#A# M 2739#101 420036' !hich lays out asic o li"ations for and restrictions upon pu lic ser$ice' for ids the use of &ederal property >for other than authori;ed acti$ities? 4M 2739#1014 64866# 2t thus arred the use of all of the &ederal property employed to produce and to send the "reetin" cards# /oreo$er' 1E U#S#C# M 1518 420036 mandates fines for anyone usin" an official en$elope or la el to a$oid ha$in" to pay their o!n posta"e for pri$ate mail# 2n this case' the official en$elopes addressed to indi$iduals o$erseas !ere improperly used to "ain Go$ernment posta"e# (dmittedly' section C1#:#8 of the Department of Defense 4DoD6 Official /ail /anual 4DoD :929#E0/' Dec# 27' 20016 authori;es the use of >appropriated fund posta"e? y DoD >acti$ities # # # !hen international diplomacy dictates#? 2n this case' ho!e$er' the officer’s "reetin"s !ere not re.uired for international diplomacy and !ere not sent on


ehalf of an >acti$ity? ut !ere from t!o indi$idualsCthe officer and his !ife# They thus did not fall !ithin the DoD e%ception#

#3@hat do you mean4 I can1t sell real estate at ,orkG63
( &ederal employee' !ho had a second career as a realtor4 printed her &ederal ("ency phone num er on her realtor usiness card# <hen she ans!ered her phone at her Go$ernment !or+place' she announced her office as FJQ- Aeal =state#F <hen ad$ised that she could not use her Go$ernment office for her commercial usiness' she left &ederal ser$ice# The record is silent re"ardin" ho! much of her duty day !as actually spent on Go$ernment !or+# Sections 9 C#&#A# 2739#50: and 509 of the Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch ar the use of Go$ernment property and resources' as !ell as official time' for unauthori;ed acti$ities 4such as conductin" a pri$ate usiness $enture6#

3@hat do you mean4 this isn1t my propertyG63
One entrepreneurial &ederal employee ac+ed his panel $an up to the office door one ni"ht and stole all the computer e.uipment# Be !asnDt too hard to catchG he tried to sell e$erythin" at a yard sale the ne%t day C !ith arcodes and F)roperty of US Go$ernmentF stic+ers still prominently displayed#

&isuse of !o ernment %esources
(lle"ations !ere made that the principal of a Department of Defense school !as usin" the school to hold personal' for0profit craft parties after hours# (fter an in$esti"ation' it !as determined that the principal did improperly use Go$ernment property# 2t !as disco$ered that the parties’ ori"inal location' !hich had een on pri$ate property' !as no lon"er a$aila le' so the principal mo$ed the parties to the school# Section 2739#50: of the Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch restricts the use of Go$ernment property' includin" DoD school uildin"s' for authori;ed purposes only#


Improper .se of !o ernment %esources
(lle"ations !ere raised that a Ka$y ci$ilian official !as usin" his Ka$y office as a head.uarters for his pri$ate company# 2t !as alle"ed that he used and pu lished his Ka$y office phone num er as the usiness’s num er and used Ka$y employees to ans!er the phone and ta+e messa"es re"ardin" the usiness for him# 2t !as also alle"ed that he used Go$ernment copiers' fa% machines' and other e.uipment for the usiness# (fter an in$esti"ation' all of the alle"ations !ere su stantiated# The official !as reduced in "rade and remo$ed from his super$isory post# Section 2739#50: of the Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch restricts the use of Go$ernment property' includin" office e.uipment and supplies' for authori;ed purposes only#

&isuse of Email
( Department of Defense 4DoD6 employee inad$ertently recei$ed an email messa"e from another employee' !hom she didn’t +no!# The messa"e !ent into "reat detail re"ardin" a pri$ate usiness $enture that the employee !as conductin" !ith a third employee# The recipient promptly for!arded the email to 2nspector General' !ho in$esti"ated and determined that the !riter of the messa"e !as usin" the Go$ernment email system for his o!n pri$ate usiness use# The employee !as !arned' ut continued his acti$ities e$en after counselin"' and !as su se.uently remo$ed from his position# )ara"raph 20301a of DoD 9900#050A' Joint =thics Ae"ulation' restricts use of Department of Defense communications systems to official and authori;ed purposes only# Super$isors may allo! limited personal use of DoD email systems under certain circumstances and !hen such use does not o$er urden the communications system' create si"nificant additional costs' and is of reasona le duration and fre.uency#

&isuse of !o ernment Telephone
( Department of Defense ci$ilian employee earned the ire of her co0!or+ers y usin" her office telephone for personal calls# (n in$esti"ation determined that the employee had indeed een a usin" her telephone pri$ile"esCfor nearly 80 hours in one calendar year alone# She !as ordered to pay for the improper calls ut !as not prosecuted 107

for the o$er t!o !or+!ee+s !orth of time she spent on the phone durin" !or+ hours# She !as issued a letter of caution y her super$isor#

#3And they e en pay me for doin' this(3
The /erit Systems )rotection -oard affirmed the decision y the Dru" =nforcement ("ency 4D=(6 to remo$e a criminal in$esti"ator for !illful misuse of a Go$ernment $ehicle# The former official !as en"a"ed in a social and se%ual relationship !ith a confidential source of information' !ho !as also the !ife of a con$icted dru" traffic+er# The former official recei$ed daily "ifts from the confidential source# Be used his official Go$ernment $ehicle to tra$el to the residence of the confidential source' and to transport her from her residence to the /iami airport and to the CafW 2"uana for purely social reasons# Be e$en "a$e her some D=(0o!ned ammunition for use in her o!n "un#

3Sorry4 Skipper4 but those really aren1t perks(3
2mmediately upon arri$in" at his ne! duty station in 2taly' the ne! commandin" officer of the Ka$y facility' in an effort to sa$e money' used an official $ehicle rather than o tainin" a rental car' !hich he !as authori;ed to do !hile a!aitin" deli$ery of his personal $ehicle# Bis use of the official $ehicle !as disco$ered !hen the car !as stolen !hen he !as at a restaurant# The su se.uent in$esti"ation also re$ealed that he had used an official oat 4called a ar"e6 to ferry himself and his social "roup to the island of 2schia for a social e$enin" 4a commercial ferry !ould ha$e cost the total party less than @206# The in$esti"ation also re$ealed that he had tried to persuade the commandin" officer of a su ordinate or"ani;ation to create a GS01: position for his spouse# The officer !as relie$ed of his command and returned stateside#

Improper Phone Calls and Attempted Co er"up
( General Ser$ices (dministration 4GS(6 employee !as remo$ed from his position for ma+in" 193 non0 usiness calls on a Go$ernment telephone to the Te%as Jottery Commission# The calls cost the GS( @E00# The employee also as+ed the recipient of the calls to pro$ide false information a out the calls y statin" that they concerned official Go$ernment usiness# The employee !as remo$ed from &ederal Ser$ice# 105

&isuse of !o ernment 7ehicle
( Department of Transportation canine enforcement team leader !as remo$ed from his position for misuse of a Go$ernment $ehicle as !ell as for a serious lac+ of *ud"ment re"ardin" the safe"uardin" of o$er @2 million !orth of cocaine# The cocaine !as used in trainin" sessions for canine enforcement teams# The former employee improperly too+ his Go$ernment $ehicle to lunch and left the cocaine unattended C all in a order to!n !here narcotics traffic+in" !as a pro lem# The char"es and the remo$al decision !ere all appealed to the /erit Systems )rotection -oard# The remo$al !as upheld#

)o, NOT to !et %ich Stealin' *ffice Supplies
( Department of ,eterans (ffairs 4,(6 re$ie! found that a ,( employee !as unla!fully remo$in" Go$ernment office supplies and e.uipment from the ,( !arehouse and pro$idin" them to his rother0in0la!' !ho !or+ed for a local retail esta lishment# /ana"ement too+ administrati$e action a"ainst the employee#

&isuse of !o ernment -etterhead and Posta'e"Paid En elope
The Department of ,eterans (ffairs 4,(6 determined that a ,( medical center employee used official ,( letterhead as !ell as a posta"e0paid en$elope to send personal correspondence to a county *ud"e re.uestin" issuance of a protecti$e order a"ainst a then0 fello! ,( employee# The employee !as issued a !ritten letter of counselin" and ad$ised that future incidents may result in disciplinary action#

Don+t &isuse !o ernment 7ehicles F E en to )elp 0our Family6
The FactsE The son and nephe! of a hi"h0le$el &ederal employee !ere ha$in" car pro lems and needed lunch# <ith !hat may ha$e een "ood intentions' this hi"h0 le$el employee decided to use a Go$ernment $ehicle to help# Be dama"ed the $ehicle' and his act !as disco$ered# Bis re!ard for helpin" his family !ith a Go$ernment $ehicleG suspension !ithout pay for :9 days and reassi"nment to a ne! position# (Source: 0onald Auc/nor 56 &6S6 Postal Ser5ice, *.8 4-28 $8 248'82, <an6 2?, 2 36%


The -a,E 31 U#S#C# M 13:8 420036 re.uires that any &ederal officer or employee !ho >!illfully uses or authori;es the use of a passen"er motor $ehicle or aircraft o!ned or leased y the United States Go$ernment'? e%cept for official purposes' e suspended !ithout pay for a minimum of one month and' >!hen circumstances !arrant' for a lon"er period? or e >summarily remo$ed from office#? /oreo$er' in Aro+n 56 &nited States Postal Ser5ice' 7: /#S#)#A# :29' :33 4188:6' the /erit Systems )rotection -oard affirmed that super$isors could e held to hi"her standards of conduct than non0 super$isors' ecause super$isors occupy positions of "reater trust and responsi ility#

&isuse of Property Causes Admiral to -ose Promotion
( lin+s0lo$in" ,ice (dmiral let his lo$e of the "ame "o too far# (ccordin" to the 2nspector General' the ,ice (dmiral misused Go$ernment property' su ordinates' and official time to sponsor a pri$ate "olf tournamentCa "olf tournament that he ad$ertised as an official e$ent# Tournament participants !ere re!arded !ith "ifts improperly solicited and accepted y the ,ice (dmiral from contractors# This led the Secretary of the Ka$y to !ithdra! the ,ice (dmiral’s nomination for a fourth star and issue him a letter of instruction and caution# The Standards of =thical Conduct for =mployees of the =%ecuti$e -ranch limit the use of Go$ernment property to authori;ed purposes only' and official time is limited to the performance of official duties# These re"ulations also prohi it the solicitation or acceptance of "ifts from prohi ited sources# The lessonG don’t let your acti$ities as a >fore? star +eep you from ecomin" a four0star#

&isuse of *fficial &ail -eads to %emo al
( GS011 (dministrati$e Ser$ices Specialist !as remo$ed for falsifyin" documents and misusin" Go$ernment property and official mail# The specialist’s super$isor had prepared a letter in his personal capacity e%pressin" his disa"reement !ith *udicial actions to free the indi$idual char"ed !ith shootin" and +illin" his sonH this letter !as mailed to indi$iduals in the la! enforcement community in non"o$ernment en$elopes !ith pri$ately0paid posta"e# The specialist too+ the letter prepared y her super$isor' placed it on Department of Justice stationary' copied the super$isor’s si"nature onto the letter' and sent it out in fran+ed a"ency en$elopes directed to mem ers of the *udicial community' the &ederal )u lic Defender’s Office' and a la! school dean' 108

all !ithout the super$isor’s +no!led"e or consent# The remo$ed employee initially denied ha$in" ta+en such actions under oath' ut later admitted that the alle"ations !ere true# (s a conse.uence of the specialist’s falsification of documents' misuse of Go$ernment property' and a use of official mail' she !as remo$ed from her position and recommended for possi le criminal char"es#

.se of !o ernment Property for Pri ate Business -eads to %emo al
(fter repeated !arnin"s' a Department of the Treasury computer specialist !as remo$ed from his position for unauthori;ed use of Go$ernment property in support of his pri$ate usiness# The employee had used his Go$ernment computer to copy his commercial usiness computer files from one floppy dis+ to another floppy dis+' and computer records sho!ed e%tensi$e acti$ity related to the employee’s comic oo+ usiness# ( su se.uent in$esti"ation sho!ed that the employee had falsified his timesheet so that it did not reflect time he had spent runnin" his pri$ate usiness durin" !or+ hours' leadin" to an e%tra @73'000 in payment for !or+ the employee did not actually perform# /any a"encies allo! limited personal use of Go$ernment property !hen the use in$ol$es minimal additional e%pense to the Go$ernment and does not o$er urden any of the a"ency’s information resources# Ke$ertheless' employees are specifically prohi ited from the pursuit of pri$ate commercial usiness acti$ities or profit0ma+in" $entures usin" the Go$ernment’s office e.uipment#

&isuse of !o ernment Property %esults in %emo al
( GS09 employee of the Department of the 2nterior !as remo$ed for misuse of Go$ernment property' failure to follo! a super$isor’s instructions' and misrepresentation of facts on official documents# 2n$esti"ations re$ealed that the employee made 1'708 unofficial calls on his Go$ernment0issued cell phone at a cost of @592#0E' and used his assi"ned laptop computer to access unauthori;ed sites# The employee further failed to follo! a super$isor’s instructions !hen he char"ed meals on his Go$ernment credit card and used a Go$ernment $ehicle after recei$in" instruction to the contrary# Jastly' the employee misrepresented facts on official documents !hen he su mitted a tra$el document re.uestin" reim ursement for a day !hen he had not actually een on official 110

tra$el' and falsely claimin" to ha$e held the desi"nation of ("ency Aepresentati$e on three occasions# The (dministrati$e Jud"e concluded that the employee’s conduct !as intentional and that he sho!ed minimal' if any' potential for reha ilitation# Conse.uently' the employee !as remo$ed and anned from see+in" &ederal employment in the future#

&isuse of *fficial 7ehicle Earns Employee K;"Day Suspension
( U#S# )ostal Ser$ice employee !ho used a Go$ernment0o!ned la! enforcement $ehicle to shop for a personal computer found himself defendin" his actions efore an appellate court *ud"e# The employee ar"ued that the use !as >official use? ecause he sometimes used his personal computer for usiness purposesH ho!e$er' the employee admitted to o!nin" a ac+up computer in addition to the ro+en one he !as shoppin" to replace' and failed to e%plain !hy he could not shop for a computer !hile off0duty# The *ud"e !as li+e!ise uncon$inced y the employee’s claim that the use !as >official? ecause he could respond to emer"encies !hile shoppin"# The *ud"e affirmed the )ostal Ser$ice’s suspension of the employee for thirty days !ithout pay#

&isuse of *fficial 7ehicle4 A'ain
( Bi"h ,olta"e =lectrician at the Ka$al -ase in )oint /a"u !as penali;ed for !illful misuse of a "o$ernment $ehicle !hen he reported to !or+' chec+ed out a $ehicle' and dro$e to the "alley for rea+fast# The employee ar"ued that he had ne$er recei$ed notification of the restriction a"ainst dri$in" "o$ernment $ehicles to meals' a claim some!hat undercut y the fact that he had si"ned a document the pre$ious month indicatin" his receipt of the rules re"ardin" misuse of "o$ernment $ehicles# The employee also ar"ued that he !as on call for emer"encies !hile eatin" rea+fast' and thus his use !as >official#? (n appellate court *ud"e re*ected this claim' findin" no e$idence that his position as a Bi"h ,olta"e =lectrician re.uired him to e >on call constantly? as descri ed# The *ud"e affirmed the electrician’s thirty0day suspension !ithout pay#


&isuse of a !o ernment 7ehicle and @eapon -eads to %emo al
( series of e"re"ious *ud"ment calls y a criminal in$esti"ator for the -ureau of (lcohol' To acco' &irearms' and =%plosi$es 4(T&6 made for ei"ht hours that ended his federal career# The in$esti"ator’s ad day e"an !hen he decided to lea$e !hile on duty in order to sho! a rental house he o!ned to a prospecti$e tenant' a ad idea made e$en !orse y his decision to dri$e his official $ehicle# Upon arri$in" at the house' the in$esti"ator found an intruder' at !hich point he decided to dra! his ser$ice !eapon and chase the intruder out' firin" a shot in the process# The in$esti"ator called the police to report the rea+0in' and upon searchin" the premises' the police turned up a second intruder hidin" in a closet 4presuma ly petrified in terror6# Bo!e$er' someho! a sent in the in$esti"ator’s recitation of the ori"inal incident !as the shot fired at the fleein" intruder' and the police .uic+ly departed to ta+e the second intruder to *ail# (pparently nonplussed at the afternoon’s e$ents' the in$esti"ator ne%t decided to dri$e across to!n 4still in his official $ehicle6 to meet yet another prospecti$e tenant# (t this point the police officers learned a out the "unshot from the second intruder' and re.uested the in$esti"ator’s presence at the police station# The in$esti"ator !as char"ed !ith 416 mishandlin" of a ser$ice !eapon' 426 failure to report dischar"e of a ser$ice !eapon' 436 misuse of a "o$ernment $ehicle' and 4:6 lac+ of candor# Keedless to say' that fateful day !as the in$esti"ator’s last in federal ser$ice#

&isuse of !o ernment Credentials %esults in Demotion
( Super$isory Special ("ent' GS01:' found herself demoted to Special ("ent' GS013' after misusin" her "o$ernment credentials in a traffic stop# The a"ent !as ridin" as a passen"er !ith a friend !hen the car !as pulled o$er y the police# (lthou"h the police officer did not re.uest that the a"ent identify herself' she immediately displayed her federal credentials !hen the officer approached# (lthou"h the a"ent ne$er re.uested special treatment from the officer' the (dministrati$e Jud"e noted that >mere self0 identification y a la! officer can result in fa$ora le treatment y another la! enforcement officer'? and for this reason a"ents are trained to e careful not to use their credentials for personal "ain# The a"ent !as also separately cited for improperly securin"


her "o$ernment0issued !eapon' !hich she stored at home > ehind the coffee mu"s on the refri"erator? ecause she had >for"otStenT the com ination? to her "un safe# 2n addition to her demotion' the a"ent !as also suspended for 1: days# (Source: 2 - (SPA 9E:'S $=$2%

Employee %emo ed for &isuse of !o ernment Computer
The 2nstallation Strate"ic )lannin" Officer at &ort Ste!ard !as relie$ed of his duties after it !as disco$ered that he had een usin" his "o$ernment laptop to oth $ie! se%ually0e%plicit materials and type up notes for his church# The officer !ill ha$e plenty of time to ponder his actions' as the /erit Systems )rotection -oard affirmed his remo$al from federal ser$ice#

-a ish A'ency Party Earns Federal Probe
On the e$e of its t!o0year anni$ersary' the Transportation Security (dministration 4TS(6 spent nearly a half0million dollars on an a!ards ceremony at a lu%urious <ashin"ton' D#C# hotel# The la$ish cele ration had o$er a thousand attendees and !as held at the Grand Byatt' !hich ills itself as >one of the most ma"nificent? hotels in <ashin"ton' D#C# The ceremony included fin"er food a$era"in" @33 per person' se$en ca+es totalin" @1'E90' and three cheese displays !orth @1'900# TS( planners paid an e$ent plannin" company @E1'575 for pla.ues' !hich they presented to 9:3 employees and 30 or"ani;ations# )lanners also spent @1':E7 on three alloon arches' @1'908 for si"ns' and @9'187 for official photo"raphs# 2n honor of this o$er0the0top cele ration' TS( !as a!arded an in$esti"ation y the Bomeland Security Department’s 2nspector General# (Source: #ssociated Press, $ ,$?,2 ?%

Certifyin' *fficer Personally -iable for .nauthori=ed Staff /Sunset Cruise2
<hen re$ie!in" the e%pense report for a !ee+0lon" staff retreat' the ,eterans (dministration 4,(6 2nspector General noted an interestin" char"e# 2ncluded in the @21'000 ill for the 200person &lorida retreat !as an @E23 char"e for a >sunset dinner cruise#? Determinin" that this item !as an >entertainment e%pense'? and notin" that the


,(’s appropriation does not authori;e funds for entertainment e%penses' the 2nspector General recommended that the office director e held personally lia le for the improper payment# Upon re$ie!' the Go$ernment (ccounta ility Office 4G(O6 found that the >certifyin" officer? is indeed personally financially lia le for improperly certified paymentsH ho!e$er' the G(O ruled that the office director !as merely an appro$in" official# The G(O ruled that the funds should e collected either from the payee' if possi le' or from the certifyin" officer !ho actually certified the payment#

A'ency Director Suspended for Personal .se of !o ernment Property
( Director of a Defense a"ency +ne! of a spare room in an a"ency !arehouse and thou"ht it !ould e the perfect place to install a o!lin" lane for a little recreation# Bo!e$er' the employee he recruited to install the o!lin" alley declined' since he !as a!are that employees are prohi ited from usin" Go$ernment property for unofficial purposes# 49 C#&#A# 2739#50: 6 Undeterred' the Director !ent to the employee’s super$isor and instructed him to issue the order# Aeluctantly' the employee o eyed his super$isor and constructed the o!lin" lane durin" his official !or+ hours# )erhaps encoura"ed y his success' the Director secretly constructed another lane# The Director $iolated 9 C#&#A# 2739#5094 6 y appropriatin" Go$ernment property and space for his o!n personal use' as !ell as !ron"fully depri$in" the Go$ernment of resources durin" the time the employee uilt and remo$ed the lane# This re"ulation prohi its personnel from >encoura"in"' directin"' coercin"' or re.uestin" a su ordinate to use official time to perform acti$ities other than those re.uired in the performance of official duties or authori;ed in accordance !ith la! or re"ulation#? &or this $iolation' the Director recei$ed a suspension# On a side note' the employee’s super$isor as !ell as the Deputy DirectorR(ccountin" Director oth recei$ed letters of admonishment for failin" to report fraud' despite the fact that each had !arned the Director and e$en attempted to stop him# (s such' it is important to remem er that personnel are accounta le not *ust for the actions they ta+e' ut also for those actions they fail to ta+e# (Source: 0epartment of 0efense, 'nspector 7eneral, 2 4%


Senior *fficer &isused Staff /for the !o ernment+s Benefit2
The Department of Defense 2nspector General found that a former hi"h ran+in" military officer had e%hi ited a >disre"ard for the proper use of his staff and for conser$in" Go$ernment resources? !hen he had his su ordinates perform personal ser$ices for him durin" official !or+ hours on many occasions# ,iolatin" 9 C#&#A# 2739#502 and 2739#5094 6' these offenses include ha$in" his su ordinates to! his personal oat after usiness hours and deli$er indi$idual family mem ers’ income ta% returns to a ta% assistance office# The officer as+ed his secretary to research nursin" homes for his mother0in0la!' arran"e personal tra$el for his !ife' and coordinate his !ee+end "olf outin"s# The officer also often re.uested mem ers of his staff handle other $arious tas+s' such as pic+in" up medical prescriptions' laundry' and his lunch# &urther' he tra$eled to a conference a day early in order to play "olf !ith other conference participants as part of his official duties# Section 2739#509 states' >(n employee shall use official time in an honest effort to perform official duties#? <hen as+ed to e%plain his actions' the officer declared >une.ui$ocally that at no time did 2 +no!in"ly $iolate? any of the standards of conduct# The officer ar"ued that dispensin" !ith these tas+s freed him to de$ote more time to his official duties' and therefore' >the true eneficiary !as the U#S# Go$ernment#? Bo!e$er' the officer’s superior disa"reed that the "olf outin" !as official duty and ordered the officer to under"o counselin"# The officer also had to reim urse the a"ency for the lod"in" and per diem costs incurred for the "olf outin"# (Source: 0epartment of 0efense, 'nspector 7eneral, 2 4%

&orale4 @elfare4 and %ecreation 8&@%< Issues
The .ltimate Deceit
( military officer !as reprimanded for fa+in" his o!n death to end an affair# <orthy of a plot in a daytime soap0opera' a Ka$y Commander e"an seein" a !oman that he had met on a datin" !e site# The Commander ne"lected to tell the !oman that he !as married !ith +ids# (fter 7 months' the Commander "re! tired of the relationship and attempted to end it y sendin" a fictitious e0mail to his lo$er 1 informin" her that he



een +illed#

The Commander then relocated to Connecticut to start a ne! y the ne! o!ners' of the Commander’s

assi"nment# Upon receipt of the letter' his mistress sho!ed up at the Commander’s house to pay her respects' only to e informed' and lost his su marine command# reassi"nment and ne! location# The Commander recei$ed a puniti$e letter of reprimand'

&isuse of !o ernment Personnel
)enta"on in$esti"ators found that the three star (rmy "eneral in char"e of the U#S# /ilitary (cademy at <est )oint misused his office y ha$in" su ordinates perform personal tas+s# The General made staffers !or+ at pri$ate dinners and charity e$ents' pro$ide free dri$in" lessons' and feed a friend’s cat# The General "a$e each of the staffers @30 and @:0 Star uc+s "ifts cards in e%chan"e for 1E hours of !or+# 2n response to the findin"s' the General paid his staffers @1'E19 ecause the !or+ performed !as not for an >official function#? 2n addition to payin" the staffers' the General recei$ed a !ritten memorandum of concern#

Ser in' at 7olleyball Tournament @as Not Permitted
( /arine Corps Commandin" Officer' directed or re.uested that his su ordinates use their official duty time to perform manual la or and other acti$ities in support of a pri$ate or"ani;ation 0 in an attempt to fundraise for the upcomin" /arine Corps -all# They performed the !or+ in e%chan"e for money and command endorsement from the or"ani;ation# They ultimately recei$ed @:E'700 in compensation from the outside or"ani;ation for performance of their official duties' in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# M208 and )ara"raph 30209 of DoD 9900#50A' the Joint =thics Ae"ulation' !hich prohi its an employee from recei$in" supplemental salary from a non0&ederal source for the performance of DoD duties# The Commandin" Officer !as disciplined and directed to transfer all the money to the U#S# Treasury#

%e"sale of &@% Products
(lle"ations !ere rou"ht a"ainst a Ka$al ase’s /orale' <elfare' and Aecreation 4/<A6 Department re"ardin" the printin" and sellin" of T0shirts# The /<A printed T0 shirts and then sold them to military mem ers' !ho then resold them at pu lic e$ents off0 ase# ( ci$ilian usinessman !ho o!ned a T0shirt usiness near y complained that 117

/<A should not e ma+in" and sellin" the T0shirts that !ere "oin" to e re0sold off0 ase# (fter an in$esti"ation' it !as determined that /<A !as not informin" the military mem ers a out the prohi ition re"ardin" the re0sale of /<A "oods and !as also not informin" the military mem ers that they could not re0sell the T0shirts' oth parts of /<A !ritten policy# /<A e"an enforcin" the policies and conducted trainin" for all of their staff#

Political Acti ity 7iolations
/I+m .ncle Sam4 and I Appro ed this &essa'e2
(n O09 reser$ist runnin" for state office decided that the usual suit' tie' and (merican fla" pin didn’t cut it# Be too+ a num er of photos of himself in his uniform' includin" his unit desi"nators' !hich he then uploaded to his campai"n <e site# Be also prominently displayed his ran+' position' and pictures of himself on a tour of duty in (f"hanistan# <hile he placed a disclaimer on his <e site statin" that the DoD did not endorse his candidacy' the disclaimer !as not easily $isi le and !as in a $ery small font# Be recei$ed a letter of reprimand after ein" forced to remo$e the photos#

Comin' to a &ailboD Near 0ou """ A )atch Act 7iolation6
(n O09 runnin" for state office issued campai"n mailers of herself in full dress uniform' and listed her ran+ in the mailers# She also used her military title in campai"n e0mails# 2n none of these circumstances did she list a disclaimer# <hen the command cau"ht on' she admitted to the uniform $iolation and recei$ed a !ritten reprimand#

Politics "" at @orkE &ore than 5ust an Impolite Dinner Topic
T!o *unior Ser$ice officers stationed at an o$erseas ase $iolated the Batch (ct and UC/J articles !hen they sent out unsolicited political emails from their "o$ernment email accounts# The emails supported the )resident and lam asted other Con"ressmen !hose politics they didn’t a"ree !ith# The emails cau"ht the attention of a retired military officer' !ho recei$ed the messa"es stateside# <hen the retiree complained a out the officers usin" "o$ernment email accounts for political purposes' the t!o officers en"a"ed in a scathin" email ac+0and0forth' tellin" the retiree at one point' >The sooner


you and people li+e you die off' the etter#? The officers recei$ed correcti$e action !ithin the Ser$ice includin" $er al counselin"#

The &ilitary Says 7ote for &e6
( Ser$ice reser$e officer !as counseled for usin" pictures of himself in full uniform on campai"n posters' !hile runnin" for a con"ressional seat in ,ir"inia# The officer !as educated on the impropriety of usin" his military ser$ice affiliation to imply endorsement y a ranch of the ser$ice# The posters !ere remo$ed#

&ore than Politically Incorrect
( ci$ilian employee in a military ser$ice sent a mass email to fello! ser$ice employees durin" the presidential election promotin" the candidacy of John /cCain and opposin" the candidacy of -arac+ O ama# The email summari;ed a story Senator /cCain told a out the importance of the )led"e of (lle"iance to himself and fello! )O<s durin" his capti$ity and !ent on to refer to O ama as a >clo!n' !ho refuses to place his hand on his heart and say the pled"e#? 2ncluded in the email !as a picture of Senator O ama !ith other politicians in !hich only O ama did not ha$e his hand on his heart# The email concluded y sayin"' >Jet’s all remem er this picture on election day#? (pparently concerned not to lea$e any ody out' the employee compiled a >to line? of addressees totalin" 18 pa"es# The employee’s actions $iolated 9 U#S#C# 532:' !hich prohi its political acti$ity !hile an employee is on duty# &or his actions' the employee recei$ed a letter of reprimand#

SeDually EDplicit Emails Are Not the *nly Emails That Can !et 0ou Fired6
T!o federal employees' one at the =n$ironmental )rotection ("ency' the other at the Social Security (dministration' !ere disciplined for $iolations of the Batch (ct# (lthou"h federal employees are entitled to support the political candidates of their choice' the Batch (ct prohi its federal employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ity !hile on duty# Durin" the 200: )residential =lection' the =)( employee fa$ored John Ierry' and !hile on duty' sent 31 of his co0!or+ers an email ur"in" them to support /r# Ierry’s campai"n# On the other hand' the SS( employee fa$ored Geor"e <# -ush' and


!hile on duty' sent a similar email to 25 of his co0!or+ers and other indi$iduals# 2t !as irrele$ant !hich candidate each employee supported' oth !ere found to ha$e $iolated the Batch (ct ecause sendin" emails in support of any candidate !hile on duty constitutes prohi ited political acti$ity# Disciplinary action for $iolations of the Batch (ct ran"e from 300day suspension !ithout pay to termination from federal employment#

Passin' *ut Campai'n Stickers at a 7A Clinic Ends Federal Career
2n his fer$or to help elect a candidate for )resident' a ,eterans (ffairs employee i"nored federal la!s prohi itin" federal employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ity on federal propertyCin this case' a ,( clinic in Ohio# There the employee passed out campai"n stic+ers promotin" his candidate# The employee later ac+no!led"ed that this seemin"ly innocuous act !as in fact a $iolation of federal la! 4the Batch (ct6# (s a result' the employee has a"reed to retire from the ,(# The penalty could ha$e een termination#

@arnin'E Federal Employees and Some Non"Federal Employees &ay Not En'a'e in Politics at @ork
The =%ecuti$e Director of Dela!are’s Ke! Castle County Bead Start )ro"ram recei$ed a 300day suspension !ithout pay for promotin" a candidate for the U#S# Bouse of Aepresentati$es in his official capacity# ,iolations of the Batch (ct don’t "et much more latant than this# The Director in$ited a candidate to spea+ to his capti$e su ordinate audience at a mandatory office meetin"# The Batch (ct prohi its federal e%ecuti$e ranch employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ity !hile on duty and from usin" their official positions' authority' or influence to interfere !ith the results of an election# Durin" the meetin"' the Director introduced the candidate' passed out campai"n materials' and offered employees the opportunity to re"ister to $ote# Be later admitted that he had $iolated the Batch (ct# -ut !hy is the Director of the Ke! Castle County Bead Start pro"ram co$ered y the Batch (ctO The ans!er is thisG the Batch (ct also co$ers state' county' or municipal e%ecuti$e a"ency employees !hose duties are connected !ith pro"rams financed in !hole or in part y federal loans or "rants# Bead Start is one such pro"ram#


A'riculture Department &ana'er Suspended for )atch Act 7iolation
( Department of ("riculture mana"er recei$ed a four0month suspension after solicitin" political contri utions from su ordinates# The Batch (ct prohi its &ederal employees from certain acti$ities in partisan political campai"ns# The employee as+ed su ordinates at !or+ to contri ute to the 1882 Democratic presidential campai"n# (lthou"h the Batch (ct !as amended in 188: to allo! &ederal employees to participate more in partisan political acti$ities' it still prohi its employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ities !hile on duty or in any Go$ernment office#

!o ernment Employees Sentenced for Political Fundraisin' in a .SDA Buildin'
&our employees of the Department of ("riculture 4USD(6 !ere con$icted for political fundraisin" on &ederal property# The USD( employees or"ani;ed a )olitical (ction Committee to raise money for the 1882 campai"n# They collected a total of @3'290 in chec+s from $arious indi$iduals in a USD( uildin"# To encoura"e donations' the four employees su""ested that contri utions to the fund mi"ht result in special consideration from the USD( officials affiliated !ith the (dministration# &ollo!in" the election' the four created a list of USD( employees !ho should not' in their opinion' recei$e special consideration from the (dministration# The four defendants each recei$ed four years pro ation# T!o of the defendants !ere fined @1'000 and ordered to perform community ser$ice# The other t!o defendants !ere fined @2'900 and ordered to ser$e 30 days detention in a half!ay house#

Political Acti itiesL&isuse of !o ernment Email System
(lle"ations !ere made a"ainst a Department of Defense ci$ilian employee re"ardin" the distri ution of political material o$er the Go$ernment email system# The alle"ation !as made after the employee sent a political attac+ messa"e re"ardin" a certain presidential candidate to e$eryone in the unitCincludin" the commandin" officer' !ho promptly notified the 2nspector General# (n in$esti"ation determined that the material !as inappropriate for distri ution throu"h the Go$ernment email system# ( !ritten memo of counselin" !as placed in the


employee’s personnel file# (lthou"h the Batch (ct !as amended in 188: to allo! &ederal employees to participate more in partisan political acti$ities' it still prohi its employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ities !hile on duty or in any Go$ernment office#

Political Acti itiesE T,o )umorous But True Stories
(n election !as comin" up and one enterprisin" youn" &ederal employee called his ethics officer to in.uire !hether it !as permitted' under the Batch (ct (mendments' to stuff allot o%esN (n employee !ho !as told not to !ear a -ush campai"n utton responded' >-ut 2’m not# This is a utton from his dad’s campai"nN?

Postal Employee )atch Act 7iolation
The U#S# Office of Special Counsel 4OSC6 announced that the /erit Systems )rotection -oard 4/S)-6 had concurred !ith OSC’s petition that a mail processor for the U#S# )ostal Ser$ice’s 4US)S6 /id0/issouri )rocessin" and Distri ution &acility $iolated the Batch (ct’s prohi ition on ein" a candidate for electi$e office in a partisan election# OSC’s petition char"ed the postal employee !ith !illfully $iolatin" the Batch (ct# The employee did not respond to OSC’s petition and instead resi"ned from the )ostal Ser$ice on /arch 9' 2001# The /S)- decision stated that >Sname !ithheld’sT resi"nation does not moot the Special Counsel’s complaint# Aather' his total failure to ans!er the complaint !arrants the ShisT remo$al from US)S#? 2n $ie! of the postal employee’s resi"nation' /S)- re.uired the )ostal Ser$ice to place a copy of its decision in the employee’s official personnel file# <hen the postal employee e"an his *o as a mail processor in Colum ia' /issouri in 1885' he !as "i$en trainin" material that e%plained that )ostal Ser$ice employees !ere co$ered y the Batch (ct and could not e candidates in partisan elections# The Batch (ct prohi its most &ederal and postal employees from runnin" for partisan office# Batch (ct penalties for &ederal and postal employees ran"e from a minimum of a 300day suspension !ithout pay to remo$al#


Federal Employee %emo ed from Position for )atch Act 7iolation
The U#S# Office of Special Counsel 4OSC6 announced that the /erit Systems )rotection -oard 4/S)-6 had "ranted its petitions to remo$e t!o U#S# )ostal Ser$ice employees from their positions as Jetter CarriersG the first in Jeff Da$is County' Geor"ia' and the second in Ke$ada County' (r+ansas# OSC’s petitions' filed !ith the /S)- in Octo er 2000' char"ed oth men !ith $iolatin" the Batch (ct’s prohi ition on ein" a candidate for electi$e office in a partisan election# -oth men had filed papers to run as independent candidates in partisan local sheriff races# -oth !ere !arned y the OSC and y their )ostal Ser$ice super$isors that their candidacies $iolated the Batch (ct# Ke$ertheless' !hen OSC filed its petitions in Octo er' oth men remained acti$e candidates and oth continued their candidacies until the Ko$em er 5th "eneral election# -oth !ere e$entually remo$ed from their positions in the )ostal Ser$ice# The Batch (ct strictly prohi its most &ederal and )ostal Ser$ice employees from runnin" for partisan electi$e office# 2t also strictly prohi its state and local employees !ho ha$e *o duties in connection !ith federally funded pro"rams from runnin" for partisan office#

EPA *fficial Disciplined for )atch Act 7iolation
( Ae"ional (dministrator at the =n$ironmental )rotection ("ency 4=)(6 in Den$er' Colorado' a"reed to a 1000day suspension to settle a petition y the U#S# Office of Special Counsel 4OSC6 alle"in" that he had $iolated the Batch (ct# The administrator had resi"ned from =)( in order to run for a /ontana Con"ressional seat' ut lost his id for election# Be !as accordin"ly appointed ac+ to his former position as Ae"ional (dministrator# OSC’s petition for disciplinary action alle"ed that the administrator su se.uently met !ith one of the remainin" Con"ressional candidates as !ell as se$eral of the candidate’s campai"n officials# Durin" that meetin"' the participants discussed the administrator’s endorsement of the candidate and the solicitation of campai"n contri utions# Shortly after the meetin"' an endorsementRfundraisin" letter !as drafted for the administrator’s re$ie! and appro$al# (mon" other thin"s' the letter statedG >Contri utin" no! to Sthe remainin" candidate’sT campai"n is a solutely critical#? 2t ur"ed recipients to > # # # ma+e a contri ution today#?


OSC’s petition alle"ed that the administrator re$ie!ed the draft letter and authori;ed the candidate’s campai"n staff to si"n his name to it' in $iolation of the Batch (ct# That (ct prohi its &ederal employees from solicitin" political contri utions# Su se.uently' the candidate’s campai"n distri uted the si"ned letter to numerous potential supporters# The Special Counsel also emphasi;ed that !hile OSC stands ready to prosecute $iolations of the Batch (ct' it prefers to help &ederal employees a$oid such $iolations# ><hen in dou t a out !hat is permissi le or impermissi le under Batch (ct'? the Special Counsel ad$ised' >2 !ould encoura"e employees to consult our office# There’s a !ealth of information at our !e site' !!!#oscc#"o$' and employees can actually e0mail .uestions to us#?

Fi e )atch Act 7iolations &ade by A'riculture Employee
The U#S# Office of Special Counsel 4OSC6 announced a consent *ud"ment had een entered in its )etition for Disciplinary (ction filed a"ainst an attorney for the Kational Ja or Aelations -oard 4KJA-6 in KJA-’s Jittle Aoc+' (r+ansas office# OSC’s petition' filed !ith the /erit Systems )rotection -oard 4/S)-6' had char"ed the attorney !ith fi$e Batch (ct $iolationsG 416 participatin" in partisan political acti$ity !hile on dutyH 426 participatin" in political acti$ity or in &ederal office spaceH 436 usin" his official authority for the purpose of interferin" !ith the result of an electionH 4:6 +no!in"ly solicitin" the political participation of indi$iduals !ith usiness interests pendin" efore the KJA-H and 496 +no!in"ly solicitin"' acceptin"' or recei$in" political contri utions# )ursuant to a stipulation' the attorney admitted that he had $iolated the Batch (ct and a"reed to e remo$ed from &ederal employment# The Batch (ct prohi its most &ederal employees from en"a"in" in partisan political acti$ities in &ederal office space or !hile on duty# The Batch (ct also prohi its &ederal employees from usin" their official authority for the purpose of affectin" the results of an electionH this !ould include usin" an official Go$ernment title and solicitin" >$olunteer? ser$ices from a su ordinate employee# The Batch (ct also prohi its +no!in"ly solicitin" the political participation of certain indi$iduals' includin" those !ith usiness pendin" efore an employee’s &ederal ("ency#


Employee+s &ayoral %un 7iolates )atch Act
<hen a &ederal ($iation (dministration employee decided to run for mayor of (l u.uer.ue' he !isely consulted his =thics Counselor# Be !as ad$ised that the Batch (ct did not prohi it him from enterin" the mayoral race# ( pro lem soon emer"ed' ho!e$er' !hen ad$ertisements' press releases' and ne!spaper editorials started to identify the employee as a Aepu lican' and the employee e"an to accept financial assistance from the Aepu lican )arty# The employee !as s!iftly contacted y the Office of Special Counsel' !hich ad$ised him that he !as in $iolation of the Batch (ct and needed to .uit his campai"n or lea$e his federal position# The employee' ho!e$er' too+ the position that he !as not in fact in $iolation of any la!s' and continued his campai"n# Unhappily for the employee' the $oters did not afford him much interest' and his campai"n ne$er truly "ot off the "round# Be did mana"e' ho!e$er' to catch the attention of the /erit Systems )rotection -oard# The employee’s $iolation of the Batch (ct earned him a 1200day suspension# (Source: +++6fedsmith6com, #pril $=, 2 -%

DC &ayor+s Chief of Staff %emo ed for )atch Act 7iolations
The former Chief of Staff to the /ayor of the District of Colum ia !as forced to $oluntarily resi"n after the U#S# Office of Special Counsel 4OSC6 char"ed him !ith t!o instances of $iolations of the Batch (ct# Specifically' the OSC char"ed that the Chief of Staff C a D#C# employee C improperly as+ed other D#C# employees to $olunteer to !or+ on the /ayor’s reelection campai"nH the Chief of Staff !as also char"ed !ith solicitin" employees to purchase tic+ets to a Democratic fundraiser# 2n return for the Chief of Staff’s $oluntary resi"nation and his a"reement not to see+ or accept employment !ith the District of Colum ia for a period of t!o years' the OSC a"reed to drop its char"es# The Batch (ct prohi its most District of Colum ia and federal employees from see+in" nomination or election to a partisan political officeH solicitin"' acceptin" or recei$in" political contri utionsH and en"a"in" in political acti$ity !hile on duty' amon" other thin"s# (Source: >S;, 3,2$, -%


Co")ostin' a Political Fundraiser Earns Suspension
(n attorney in the Ci$il Di$ision of the Department of Justice e%perienced the other side of the *udicial process after ein" char"ed y the U#S# Office of Special Counsel 4OSC6 !ith a $iolation of the Batch (ct# The attorney had self0reported that he had co0hosted a political fundraiser for se$en in$itees' presuma ly una!are that this !as a $iolation of the Batch (ct# The attorney reached a $oluntary settlement !ith the OSC in !hich he ser$ed a 300day suspension# The attorney $iolated 9 U#S#C# 53234a6426' !hich prohi its federal employees from +no!in"ly solicitin"' acceptin" or recei$in" political contri utions# The Batch (ct prohi its most District of Colum ia and federal employees from see+in" nomination or election to a partisan political officeH solicitin"' acceptin" or recei$in" political contri utionsH usin" their official authority to interfere !ith the results of an electionH and en"a"in" in political acti$ity !hile on duty' amon" other thin"s#

Political Emails at @ork -ead to Employee %emo al
(n attorney for the Small -usiness (dministration !as remo$ed from his position after it !as disco$ered that o$er a period of three years' he had recei$ed' read' drafted or sent o$er 100 emails from his "o$ernment computer related to partisan acti$ity# The attorney' an elected official of the California Green )arty' used the computer for emails in$ol$in" issues such as drafts of party platforms' the plannin" of party con$entions' party fundraisin"' and party recruitment# (lthou"h the attorney had pre$iously assured his super$isor C !ho !as a!are of his political acti$itiesCthat he !ould not $iolate the Batch (ct' this assurance pro$ed to e decepti$e# The Batch (ct prohi its most District of Colum ia and federal employees from see+in" nomination or election to a partisan political office' solicitin"' acceptin" or recei$in" political contri utions' usin" their official authority to interfere !ith the results of an election' and en"a"in" in political acti$ity !hile on duty' amon" other thin"s# (Source: >S;, $$,2=, -%

)umorous Partisan Emails Found to 7iolate the )atch Act
Durin" the 200: election' the Office of Special Counsel 4OSC6 filed t!o complaints alle"in" that &ederal employees had $iolated the Batch (ct y sendin" 129

politically partisan e0mail messa"es to co!or+ers# 2n the first complaint' the OSC alle"ed that an employee at the =n$ironmental )rotection ("ency sent an e0mail to fifteen co!or+ers that contained a !idely0circulated photo"raph and se$eral ne"ati$e statements a out one candidate# 2n the second complaint' the OSC alle"ed that an (ir &orce ci$ilian employee sent an e0mail !hile on official duty to 50 recipients that contained a moc+ resume of one of the candidates# The Batch (ct prohi its &ederal employees from en"a"in" in political acti$ity !hile on duty' !hile in any room or uildin" occupied in the dischar"e of official duties y an indi$idual employed y the Go$ernment' !hile !earin" a uniform' or !hile in a Go$ernment $ehicle# The Batch (ct does not prohi it >!ater cooler?0type discussions amon" co0!or+ers a out current e$ents' and conse.uently does not prohi it >!ater cooler? discussion o$er e0mail# =0mail can e used as an alternati$e mode for casual con$ersation' ut a line is crossed !hen &ederal employees disseminate their messa"e to a mass audience' ena lin" them to en"a"e in an electronic form of leafletin" at the !or+site# OSC has ad$ised that in order to determine !hether an e0mail $iolates the Batch (ct prohi ition a"ainst en"a"in" in political acti$ity' it !ill consider the follo!in"G the audience that recei$ed the e0mail' the num er of people to !hom the e0mail !as sent' the sender’s relationship to the recipient' !hether the purpose of the messa"e is to encoura"e the recipient to support a particular political party or candidate' !hether the messa"e !as sent in a &ederal uildin"' and !hether the &ederal employee !as on duty#

No Politics @hen In .niform
( military Department chastised t!o political ri$als !hen their camps ran campai"n ads displayin" uniformed /arines# The Democratic and Aepu lican opponents in one Con"ressional District attempted to use the appearance of military support to ensure $ictory on =lection Day' ut a friendly $isit from a military representati$e .uic+ly forced them to pull their ads# One of the uniformed men pictured' a $eteran' said he elie$ed that ecause he !as on inacti$e reser$e' he could >spea+ his mind#? /ilitary spo+esperson pointed out' ho!e$er' >2t doesn’t matter if he or she is on inacti$e reser$e'? re"ulations strictly prohi it ser$ice mem ers from !earin" uniforms in any


circumstances that mi"ht imply military endorsement of a certain candidate# (lthou"h in such situations the indi$idual ser$ices could ta+e disciplinary andRor administrati$e action' military in$esti"ators deemed the ser$ice mem ers’ in$ol$ement honest mista+es# 4Department of Defense' 2nspector General6

T,o Ser ice &embers Posed for Pictures at Political E ent
T!o ser$ice mem ers made a fau% pas !hen local political leaders in$ited them to attend a >Jincoln -irthday dinner#? Under the "uise that their in$itations to the fundraiser !ere in honor of their ser$ice in 2ra.' oth ser$ice mem ers attended the seemin"ly harmless e$ent# They soon found themsel$es in the spotli"ht' ho!e$er' !hen called on sta"e and presented !ith a U#S# fla"# (lthou"h neither spo+e at the function' their presence !as a cle$er tactic for special >photo opportunities? used to sho! military support of the campai"n# )osted on the local party’s !e site' the presentation photos $iolated re"ulations that prohi it acti$e duty ser$ice mem ers from attendin" political e$ents as official representati$es of the (rmed &orces# Ae"ulations stipulate that ser$ice mem ers should a$oid any acti$ity that people may $ie! as associatin" the Department of Defense 4DoD6 directly or indirectly !ith a partisan political e$ent# DoD does permit unofficial attendance at such e$ents ut only so lon" as the attendee is a spectator' not in uniform# Upon disco$erin" the photos' one of the ser$ice mem ers immediately too+ action to remo$e the photos and alert his chain of command# -ecause of these actions' and in li"ht of the fact that the party apparently lured them to the e$ent under false pretences' the t!o ser$ice mem ers recei$ed only counselin"# 4DoD 2nspector General6

Post"Employment 7iolations 8#9 .(S(C( : $;R"Type 7iolations<
Post Employment /-ifetime Ban2
( Go$ernment employee that !as in$ol$ed in appro$in" a contract for audioR$isual e.uipment left the Go$ernment to !or+ for that contractor# (t the completion of !or+' the Go$ernment had paid appro%imately @7 million for @E:1'000 !orth of e.uipment# Se$eral indi$iduals !ere char"ed !ith fraud' and the employee that left the Go$ernment for the outside position !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" the post0


employment restriction in 1E U#S#C# M 2054a6416# Be recei$ed one year pro ation and a @29'000 fine#

Friends in -o, Places
The former deputy associate director of /inerals Ae$enue /ana"ement at the /ineral /ana"ement Ser$ice of the U#S# Department of 2nterior 4DO26 pled "uilty to $iolatin" post "o$ernment employment restrictions# /ilton I# Dial admitted acceptin" a position as a su contractor !or+in" for and representin" a company in a contract !ith DO2 appro%imately si% months after retirin" from the a"ency# -efore his retirement from DO2 Dial created the e$aluation criteria for the ids for this same contract' ser$ed on the e$aluation committee that a!arded the contract to the company' and ser$ed as the contractin" officer’s technical representati$e at DO2 for the company’s contract until the time of his retirement# The company !as o!ned y a friend of Dial’s' Jimmy <# /ay erry' !ho had li+e!ise een a DO2 employee# /ay erry pled "uilty to a felony $iolation of the conflict of interest la!' admittin" in plea documents that he created the re.uirements for the same contract immediately efore his retirement from DO2 !ith the intent of iddin" on the contract immediately after his retirement# <hen iddin" too+ place' /ay erry' not surprisin"ly' !as a!arded the contract after he !as the only applicant to recei$e a "rade of >e%cellent? on e$ery .ualification cate"ory# /ay erry !as sentenced to t!o years of pro ation and a @2'900 fine# Dial’s sentencin" is still pendin"' ut he faces a ma%imum sentence of fi$e years in prison' a fine of @290'000' and a term of super$ised release#

Po,er Point
( /ilitary Ser$ice Captain had' under his official responsi ility a pro"ram !ith a "o$ernment contractor durin" his last year of ser$ice# The Captain prepared a )o!erpoint presentation recommendin" the ser$ice contract !ith this company# (fter lea$in" the ser$ice' the Captain !ent to !or+ for the same "o$ernment contractor# Be !as treated to an ethics counselin" session after he approached the Go$ernment on ehalf of his ne! company and deli$ered 0 as the company’s representati$e 0 the same )o!erpoint presentation recommendin" the ser$ice contract !ith his company# 12E

The Captain’s actions $iolated 1E U#S#C# 205' !hich prohi its former officers or employees of the e%ecuti$e ranch from ma+in"' !ith the intent to influence' communications or appearances efore a &ederal Go$ernment officer or employee in connection !ith a particular matter in !hich the former officer or employee participated personally and su stantially !hile an officer or employee#

Federal Employee+s Post"Employment 7iolations Cost Boein' CB#I &illion4 Federal Employee Ends .p Behind Bars
The former chief procurement officer for the (ir &orce' !ho !as responsi le for a!ardin" illions of dollars in contracts' re.uested -oein" e%ecuti$es to "i$e her dau"hter and son0in0la! *o s at -oein"# They did' and after the chief procurement officer retired from the (ir &orce' they "a$e her a *o ' too# (fter a criminal in$esti"ation' -oein" admitted to corruption char"es in$ol$in" conflicts of interest and other unrelated $iolations# -oein" settled !ith the Justice Department for @719 million# The former (ir &orce chief procurement officer met !ith -oein"’s Chief &inancial Officer and discussed a potential *o !ith -oein" !hile -oein" !as see+in" a @20 illion contract to lease tan+er aircraft to the (ir &orce# &ederal ethics rules re.uire federal employees to dis.ualify themsel$es from participatin" in matters re"ardin" companies !ith !hich they are see+in" employment' and federal la! imposes criminal lia ility !hen federal employees participate in matters in !hich they ha$e a personal financial interest# The procurement officer did not dis.ualify herself from participatin" in matters in$ol$in" -oein" as she should ha$e# Aather' she used her position to "et her dau"hter' son0in0la!' and herself *o s# She ended up ser$in" a prison sentence for conflicts of interest $iolations# -oein"’s Chief &inancial Officer !as also char"ed in the in$esti"ation and pled "uilty to aidin" and a ettin" acts affectin" a personal financial interest# Be !as sentenced to four months in prison' a @290'000 fine' and 200 hours of community ser$ice# 2n addition to settlin" !ith the "o$ernment for @719 million' -oein"’s @20 illion tan+er lease contract !as canceled#

Conflict of Interest Earns *fficial *ne 0ear Probation
The Chief of the Bead.uarters Support -ranch found herself >fired? after a conflict of interest re"ardin" hand"un procurement# The official e"an employment tal+s 128

!ith a company that ran a >re$erse auctionin" ser$ice? for &ederal a"enciesH throu"h this ser$ice' the company facilitated online auctions for &ederal contracts in e%chan"e for a commission from successful recipients# The official !isely consulted her ethics counselor re"ardin" her *o hunt' and assured the counselor that she !ould dis.ualify herself from in$ol$ement !ith any contracts in$ol$in" the company# Unfortunately' the official su se.uently participated personally and su stantially in a hand"un procurement in !hich she +ne! that the company had a financial interest# 2n addition to attendin" meetin"s and ma+in" phone calls related to the procurement' the official directed her su ordinate to re.uire all prospecti$e idders to re"ister !ith and utili;e the company’s ser$ices# The official pled "uilty to a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 20E for participatin" personally and su stantially in a particular matter in !hich an or"ani;ation !ith !hom she !as ne"otiatin" for employment had a financial interest# She !as sentenced to one year of pro ation' :0 hours of community ser$ice' and a @1'000 fine#

@atch %epresentin' a Business to the A'ency @here Employed the Pre ious 0ear6
The FactsE ( Senior =%ecuti$e Ser$ice 4S=S6 employee of the State Department' !ho had een tas+ed !ith assistin" the -osnian Go$ernment in purchasin" military e.uipment and trainin"' retired and !ithin se$eral days too+ employment !ith a pri$ate contractor of military hard!are# Si% months later' he recommended to the United States =m assy in Sara*e$o that it support his id for a contract et!een his ne! employer and the -osnian Go$ernment# Bis id for the contract !as successful' ut he also succeeded in securin" le"al action from the United States Go$ernment# The employee a"reed to a @10'000 settlement in e%chan"e for ein" released from le"al proceedin"s# 4SourceG Office of Go$ernment =thics memorandum' Oct# 2002#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2054c6 420036 ars e$ery S=S employee for one year after endin" employment !ith the United States from +no!in"ly communicatin" !ith the &ederal a"ency or office !ith !hich he or she has !or+ed' !ith the intent of influencin" that a"ency or office on ehalf of anyone 4other than the Go$ernment6 !ho see+s an official action#


DoD *fficial Pays C#$4;;; to Department of 5ustice to Settle Ethics Complaint
( former DoD Deputy 2nspector General 42G6 paid @12'000 to the Go$ernment to settle alle"ations that he $iolated 1E U#S#C# 2054a6426' a criminal statute that prohi its former Go$ernment employees from representin" others to the Go$ernment on matters that !ere under the former employeeDs official responsi ility durin" his last year in office# The prohi ition lasts for t!o years after the former employee lea$es office# 2n this case' durin" the former Deputy 2GDs last year in office' his audit staff commenced an audit of a particular DoD pro"ram# The audit report' !hich !as not released until after the Deputy 2G had left the Go$ernment' recommended eliminatin" part of the pro"ram that !as operated y a pri$ate contractor# The same contractor hired the former Deputy 2G' !ho had y then een "one o$er one year' as an independent auditor to re$ie! the audit report# On se$eral occasions' !hile actin" on ehalf of the contractor' and !ithin t!o years after lea$in" DoD' the former Deputy 2G contacted DoD employees and critici;ed the report !ith the intent to influence the *ud"ment of the DoD employees# 1E U#S#C# 2054a6426 prohi its such representations# This statute is often o$erloo+ed y Go$ernment employees# 2t includes all particular matters in$ol$in" specific parties in !hich the United States is a party or has a direct and su stantial interest that !ere actually pendin" under the former employeeDs official responsi ility durin" his or her last year of employment# This includes matters that the former employee may not ha$e +no!n a out' or matters in !hich the employee may not ha$e played in role in determinin"' ut' ecause of the employeeDs position' !ere pendin" under his or her official responsi ility# (s noted a o$e' the statute prohi its the former employee from representin" anyone to the Go$ernment re"ardin" such matters for a period of t!o years after the employee lea$es Go$ernment ser$ice#

SEC Attorney Sentenced for S,itchin' Sides After -ea in' !o ernment
( former attorney !ith the Den$er re"ional office of the Securities and =%chan"e Commission 4S=C6 !as con$icted for $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2054a6' !hich prohi its former Go$ernment employees from communicatin" !ith the Go$ernment !ith re"ard to matters they !or+ed on as Go$ernment employees# The S=C attorney !as responsi le for


in$esti"atin" certain stoc+ promoters re"ardin" their promotion of stoc+ in a certain company that the promoters o!ned# Upon departure from the S=C' the attorney !as hired y the same stoc+ promoters to perform le"al !or+ for their su sidiary companies' includin" the company the attorney had een in$esti"atin" !hile at S=C# The attorney' in his ne! capacity as director and counsel for the company' responded to a su poena and communicated !ith S=C officials on ehalf of the company in .uestion# The attorney !as sentenced to one year of imprisonment for this $iolation of a criminal post0employment statute#

Deputy Assistant Attorney !eneral Settles Post"!o ernment Employment 7iolation
The Deputy (ssistant (ttorney General 4D((G6 of the 2nformation Aesources /ana"ement 42A/6 office !ithin the Department of Justice left Go$ernment ser$ice in January 1888# 2n his former position' he had mana"ed the $arious functions of the 2A/ office' !hich is responsi le for maintainin"' assessin"' desi"nin"' and procurin" the information systems and telecommunications for the Department of Justice# (t all pertinent times' he !as paid at the rate of le$el 9 of the =%ecuti$e Ser$ice pay scale# (fter the former D((G left Go$ernment ser$ice' he *oined Science (pplications 2nternational Corporation 4S(2C6# On (pril 5' 1888' no! !or+in" for S(2C' the former D((G telephoned the (ctin" D((G of 2A/# Be told the (ctin" D((G that he +ne! that the Department of Justice !as considerin" not usin" S(2C on a ne! contract' and stated that such action mi"ht re.uire a payment to S(2C' !hich could' in turn' tri""er the (nti0Deficiency (ct ecause ud"eted funds !ould ha$e een e%ceeded# The Go$ernment maintained that the former D((G’s conduct $iolated 1E U#S#C# 2054c6' a criminal statute that prohi its a former senior employee from communicatin" to or appearin" efore employees of his former department or ("ency for one year after lea$in" the Go$ernment' on ehalf of another' !ith the intent to influence official action# )ursuant to a ci$il settlement a"reement si"ned y the parties in (u"ust 2000' the former D((G paid the Go$ernment @30'000' and the Go$ernment released him from its claims#

Ci il Complaint Filed A'ainst FDA Chemist for Post"Employment Acti ities

(ccordin" to the Go$ernmentDs ci$il complaint' the accused chemist !as employed y the United States &ood and Dru" (dministration 4&D(6 in the Office of Generic Dru"s 4OGD6 for a period of appro%imately t!o years# 2n that capacity' the chemist performed re$ie!s of ( re$iated Ke! Dru" (pplications 4(KD(s6 su mitted y pharmaceutical companies see+in" to "ain appro$al to manufacture and mar+et "eneric $ersions of inno$ator dru"s# Shortly efore lea$in" employment !ith the &D(' the chemist completed the first0le$el chemistry re$ie! of a pharmaceutical company’s (KD( for /icona;ole Kitrate ,a"inal Creme 2U' an alle"ed "eneric e.ui$alent to the prescription dru" /onistat05# Bis re$ie! consisted of an e%tensi$e analysis of the chemical components' manufacturin" process' testin" methods' and la elin" re.uirements of the product# (ppro%imately t!o years later' the chemist commenced employment as ,ice )resident of Ae"ulatory (ffairs and United States ("ent for the same pharmaceutical company# Be su se.uently contacted OGD officials on numerous occasions in an effort to o tain appro$al of the company’s (KD(' !hich !as still pendin" efore OGD# Bis contacts consisted of status calls in !hich he ur"ed OGD representati$es to speed up the process of appro$al of the application and su stanti$e discussions concernin" pro lems !ith the application# ( su se.uent in$esti"ation found that throu"hout the chemist’s contacts !ith OGD officials' he !as a""ressi$e in see+in" the appro$al of the (KD(# &urther' the chemist used his ac.uaintance !ith super$isory0le$el OGD officials from his tenure as an OGD employee in an attempt to "et special treatment for the (KD(# The (KD( !as appro$ed se$eral months later# 2n the complaint' the Go$ernment alle"ed that the former employee’s actions $iolated 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416' !hich permanently prohi its a former Go$ernment employee from communicatin" to or appearin" efore the Go$ernment' on ehalf of another' in connection !ith a particular matter' in$ol$in" specific parties' in !hich he participated personally and su stantially as a Go$ernment employee# )ursuant to a settlement a"reement' the former employee a"reed to pay the Go$ernment @19'000' and the Go$ernment released him from its claims#


Improper Post"Employment Acti ities by Former Contract Administrator
(s contract administrator for the United States (ir &orce' the employee !as responsi le for assurin" compliance !ith the terms of t!o separate construction contracts et!een the Go$ernment and a pri$ate contractor# (fter lea$in" the Go$ernment' the contract administrator !as hired y the same contractor' and he ecame the company’s contract administrator on the same t!o contracts in .uestion# <hile representin" the contractor' he su mitted contract pro"ress reports to the Go$ernment in order to insure that the Go$ernment !ould compensate the company# =$entually' the former &ederal employee su mitted to the Go$ernment an e.uita le ad*ustment claim for appro%imately @95:'713 on one of the contracts# The contract had a asic $alue of @1#3 million# The former &ederal employee !as con$icted on t!o counts of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416' a post0employment restriction that prohi its former Go$ernment employees intendin" to influence official action from communicatin" to or appearin" efore the Go$ernment' on ehalf of another' in connection !ith particular matters in$ol$in" specific parties in !hich they participated personally and su stantially as Go$ernment employees# )ursuant to 1E U#S#C# 2174a6426' he !as sentenced to si% months of imprisonment' si% months of home confinement' a fine of @2000' and a special assessment of @200#

Air Force *fficer Pleads !uilty to #9 .(S(C( $;R 7iolation
(n (ir &orce Colonel at =ielson (ir &orce -ase !or+ed on the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect' an appro%imately @50 million contract to uild military family housin" at the ase# The housin" !ould e o!ned y a ci$ilian de$eloper and leased to the United States# The Colonel !as assi"ned to o$ersee the pro*ect and !as the <in" CommanderDs direct representati$e# Be !as also the chairman of the FE01 Bousin" <or+in" Group'F !hich met !ee+ly to discuss any pro lems arisin" from the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect# Throu"h his position as chairman of the E01 Bousin" <or+in" Group' the Colonel !or+ed !ith representati$es of the corporation !hich too+ o$er as construction contractor for the pro*ect in /ay 188:# 2n Octo er of 1889' the corporation ac.uired o!nership of a second corporation# 2n January 1887' the Colonel e"an to e%press an interest in ecomin" an employee of the first corporation# Be retired from acti$e duty 13:

!ith the United States (ir &orce durin" July 1887 and e"an to !or+ for the company as General /ana"er' Go$ernment Ser$ices Di$ision' in (u"ust 1887# The United States continued to en"a"e in contractual matters !ith the corporation !ith respect to the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect# 2n Septem er 1887' the United States and the second' ac.uired corporation entered into a lease !herein the United States leased from the corporation the military housin" units of the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect# Under the lease a"reement' the United States !as to pay the second corporation @E'7EE'190#00 on or a out Octo er 19' 1887' ut did not ma+e the payment until Octo er 21' 1887# On or a out the 15th and 1Eth of Octo er 1887' the no!0retired Colonel' as a representati$e of oth corporations' contacted an employee of the (ir &orce to attempt to e%pedite the late payment on the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect# 2n addition' on or a out the 18th or 20th of /ay 1885' the retired Colonel' a"ain on ehalf of the corporations' contacted an employee of the (ir &orce to e%press displeasure re"ardin" the (ir &orceDs !arranty claims on the E01 Bousin" )ro*ect# The United States char"ed the retired Colonel !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416 y contactin" (ir &orce employees re"ardin" the late payment and the !arranty claims# 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416 ars former &ederal personnel 4ci$ilians and military6 from representin" another to &ederal a"encies !ith the intent to influence re"ardin" particular matters that in$ol$e specific parties in !hich the former employee participated personally and su stantially !hile in &ederal employment# The retired Colonel pleaded "uilty to one misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416 and a"reed to pay a fine of @9'000#

Bureau of Indian Affairs 8BIA< Superintendent Commits #9 .(S(C( $;R 7iolation
The 2ndian -usiness De$elopment Grant 42-DG6 pro"ram !as created to pro$ide &ederal "rant funds to eli"i le 2ndian persons and 2ndian tri al or"ani;ations# &unds to e released throu"h the 2-DG pro"ram must e appro$ed y the -2(# The -2( ("ency Superintendent for the Cro! Aeser$ation !as found to ha$e misapplied @103'590 of 2-DG funds and @311'259 of Cro! Tri e funds for the purchase of land y the Cro! Tri e from a pri$ate party# The land purchase !as ne$er completed# The superintendent su se.uently retired from the -2( in 188: and ecame employed y the Cro! Tri e as 139

mana"er of the tri al casino# -e"innin" in 1887' the former superintendent represented the Cro! Tri e in appearances efore the -2( in connection !ith the reconciliation and *ustification for the release of the @103'590 of 2-DG funds that the superintendent had appro$ed for the failed land purchase in 1882# The former superintendent !as char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 205' representin" the Cro! Tri e efore the United States in connection !ith the reconciliation and *ustification for the release of 2-DG funds' a matter in !hich he had participated personally and su stantially as a superintendent of the -2(# Be !as also char"ed !ith $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 351 4conspiracy to con$ert &ederal funds6' 1E U#S#C# 7:1 4!illfully con$ertin" &ederal funds6' and 1E U#S#C# 1173 4misapplication of tri al monies6 and found "uilty on all ut the 1E U#S#C# 1173 char"e# Be !as sentenced to fi$e yearsD pro ation' si% monthsD detention' a @190 Special (ssessment to the Crime ,ictims &und' and a @7'000 fine#

Internal %e enue Ser ice 8I%S< *fficer Pleads !uilty to #9 .(S(C( $;R 7iolation
<hile a collection officer for the 2AS' the accused !as assi"ned to the collection cases of t!o 2AS ta%payers# (fter the accused left the 2AS' he represented oth ta%payers efore the 2AS in connection !ith the collection cases to !hich he had een assi"ned as an 2AS employee# Be !as char"ed !ith t!o $iolations of 1E U#S#C# 2054a6416' ma+in" a communication to and an appearance efore an officer and employee of the 2AS' on ehalf of the t!o ta%payers in connection !ith a matter in !hich the United States !as a party or had an interest and in !hich he had participated !hile an 2AS employee# The accused pled "uilty to the char"es and !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and 100 hours of community ser$ice#

.nited States Army *fficer and Procurement *fficial Fined CI;4;;; for #9 .(S(C( $;R and Procurement Inte'rity Act 7iolations
The (rmy Officer coordinated acti$ities for all medical facilities !ithin his re"ion' includin" (rmy' Ka$y' and (ir &orce facilities# 2n 188:' the officer retired from the (rmy and e"an employment !ith a defense contractor# This contractor had


pre$iously een a!arded a contract to pro$ide inpatient and outpatient psychiatric ser$ices in support of <illiam -eaumont (rmy /edical CenterH !hile the officer !as employed y the (rmy' his official duties had included a!ardin" and super$isin" this contract# The (rmy (udit ("ency su se.uently e"an an audit of the contractor’s contract to determine !hether an option to rene! the contract should e e%ercised# The audit !as completed on January 10' 188:' and for!arded to the officer# On July 12' 1889' a re.uest for proposals !as issued y the (udit ("ency for a follo!0on contract to pro$ide essentially the same ser$ices that !ere ein" pro$ided y the contractor# On Octo er 13' 1889' the contractor su mitted a proposal' !hich !as si"ned y the retired officer as the companyDs Senior ,ice )resident# The retired officer !as char"ed !ith ci$il $iolations of the )rocurement 2nte"rity (ct' :1 U#S#C# :234f6416' and of 1E U#S#C# 2054a6426' and 2054c6416# )ursuant to a settlement a"reement dated July 23' 188E' the accused a"reed to pay the United States @90'000 in e%chan"e for the United StatesD dismissal of the complaint#

Attorney for Securities and EDchan'e Commission 8SEC<4 Di ision of Enforcement 7iolates #9 .(S(C( $;R
2n 1883' the S=C attorney !as assi"ned to in$esti"ate a "roup of persons for securities fraud in$ol$in" the payment of ri es to manipulate the mar+et for the shares of certain companies# These ri es consisted of +ic+ ac+s promoters !ere payin" ro+ers to tout the stoc+s of their companies# (s part of this in$esti"ation' the attorney in$esti"ated t!o stoc+ promoters' !ho cooperated in the attorney’s in$esti"ation and "a$e him s!orn testimony in !hich they admitted to en"a"in" in the payment of ri es intended to manipulate the share price of the company’s stoc+# The attorney left the S=C on &e ruary 20' 1889 under threat of suspension for unrelated misconduct# Be !as immediately hired y the t!o stoc+ promoters to ser$e as their corporation’s le"al counsel# 2n January 1887' the S=CDs Ke! Por+ office' !or+in" in con*unction !ith the U#S# (ttorneyDs office in the =astern District of Ke! Por+' e"an an in$esti"ation of the entire matter# 2n &e ruary 1887' the S=C issued a su poena for documents from the promoters’ corporation# The attorney' !ho !as then the corporation’s counsel and also on the corporationDs oard of directors' participated in respondin" to that su poena#


2n$esti"ators char"ed that the attorney’s participation included communications !ith S=C officials that $iolated 1E U#S#C# 2054a6' !hich prohi its former Go$ernment employees from communicatin" !ith the Go$ernment !ith intent to influence in connection !ith particular matters in$ol$in" specific parties in !hich they participated personally and su stantially as Go$ernment employees# The attorney and fi$e other defendants 4includin" the t!o stoc+ promoters6 !ere indicted in Octo er 1887 for securities fraud# (fter the fi$e co0defendants pleaded "uilty' the attorney !as indicted on a host of ne! char"es' includin" securities fraud' money launderin"' and a $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 2054a6# Be pled "uilty to three counts' includin" the 2054a6 char"e#

Federal A iation Administration 8FAA< &ana'er %esi'ns and Then )as Improper Contact ,ith the A'ency
<hile super$isin" the (ir!ay &acilities -ranch of the &((' the mana"er had official in$ol$ement in the procurement of F(ir!ay &acilities Trainin" Ser$ices#F This &(( contract !as $alued at @:3'705'599# On /arch 25' 1882' the mana"er accepted a position !ith a idder for the a o$e0descri ed contract as F/ana"er' Trainin" Ser$ices on the &ederal ($iation (dministrationDs (ir!ay &acilities Contract#F On (u"ust 10' 1882' the idder included the former mana"er’s name as F)ro"ram /ana"erF in the id proposal# /em ers of the Source =$aluation -oard' reco"ni;in" the name' ecame concerned as to the possi le $iolations of procurement inte"rity la!s and sou"ht ad$ice from &(( le"al counsel# The &(( le"al counsel re.uested an official in$esti"ation on June E' 1883# =$idence produced durin" the in$esti"ation indicated that the mana"er in his former capacity had personally re$ie!ed' amended' and corrected the Statement of <or+ for the id' and had also een responsi le for the nominations of t!o selection oard mem ers for the contract# (fter resi"nin"' the former mana"er appeared efore the &(( on ehalf of the idder' his then0employer' at meetin"s pertainin" to the procurement# The former mana"er pled "uilty to a sin"le count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2054a6426' and !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and !as fined @9000# This statute ars former &ederal personnel from representin" a party to &ederal a"encies' for a period of t!o years after lea$in" Go$ernment' re"ardin" particular matters in$ol$in" specific


parties !hich !ere pendin" under the employee’s official responsi ility durin" the employee’s last year of &ederal ser$ice#

Senior &ember of the Board of !o ernors of the Federal %eser e System 7iolates #9 .(S(C( $;R
&ollo!in" her resi"nation' the former -oard of Go$ernors mem er !as elected to the oards of directors of a num er of companies# One of these companies !as affected y a "uideline issued y the &ederal Aeser$e called the hi"hly le$era"ed transaction 4BJT6 "uideline# The &ed re.uested pu lic comment on the BJT "uideline# The company in .uestion su mitted a !ritten comment to the &ed' and company officials met !ith a mem er of the &edDs -oard of Go$ernors# The former -oard of Go$ernors mem er oth arran"ed and attended the meetin"# She introduced the company officials to the mem er of the &edDs -oard of Go$ernors' ut said nothin" durin" the su stanti$e part of the meetin"# The company paid the former employee @1'900 for her participation in the meetin"# The former employee a"reed to pay a @9'000 ci$il fine in connection !ith a criminal in$esti"ation into !hether she $iolated the one0year ar of 1E U#S#C# 2054c6' the post0employment acti$ities statute# This statute prohi its former senior Go$ernment officials for one year after lea$in" their senior positions from representin" or appearin" efore employees of their former a"encies on ehalf of another !ith the intent to influence them re"ardin" official action#

Former *fficial at the Department of A'riculture+s Federal Crop Insurance Corporation 8FCIC< Improperly %epresents Ne, Employer to .(S( !o ernment
( ma*or crop insurance corporation e"an the &C2C appeal process !ith respect to ad$erse &C2C decisions on certain claims 4includin" the case of a certain /aine potato farmer6 y sendin" to the official in .uestion a notice of intent to appeal# Jater that year' the official left the &C2C and *oined the crop insurance corporation as a consultant# (fter the &C2C re*ected the appeals that the company had initiated' the official repeatedly tried


to persuade ("ency officials to reconsider the denial of the appeal in$ol$in" the /aine potato farmer# The former official pled "uilty to t!o counts of $iolatin" the t!o0year restriction on post0employment contacts codified at 1E U#S#C# 2054a6426 and !as sentenced to pro ation# This statute ars former employees for a period t!o years from representin" others to &ederal a"encies re"ardin" particular matters in$ol$in" specific parties !hich !ere pendin" under the former employee’s official responsi ility durin" his or her last year of &ederal ser$ice#

Employee !ets T,o 0ears Probation for Improper Post"!o ernment %epresentations
( contract specialist for the General Ser$ices (dministration 4GS(6 pled "uilty to $iolatin" conflict0of0interest la!s after her retirement from federal ser$ice# Durin" the specialist’s fi$e years at the GS(' she o$ersa! a num er of soft!are0related contracts# She !as in$ol$ed personally and su stantially in one lar"e contract in particular' the ne"otiation of !hich encompassed the span of se$eral years# Upon retirement from her position at the GS(' the contract specialist sou"ht employment !ith the company that had recei$ed the lar"e contract# O$er the ne%t se$eral months' the specialist contacted GS( multiple times !ith the intent to influence GS( to e%tend the company’s contract as !ell as a!ard the company ne! contracts# The specialist pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E USC 2054a6416' !hich prohi its an e%ecuti$e ranch employee from +no!in"ly ma+in"' !ith the intent to influence' any communication to any a"ency on ehalf of any other person in connection !ith a particular matter in !hich the person participated personally and su stantially as such officer or employee# She !as sentenced to t!o years super$ised pro ation and su stance a use treatment#

Ne'otiatin' ,ith Employer @hile En'a'ed in *fficial &atters Earns CI;;; Fine
The Chief of Staff for the )resident’s Critical 2nfrastructure )rotection -oard 4)C2)-6 in the Office of Bomeland Security participated in ne"otiations !ith a company for a contract to pro$ide support functions for the -oard# Bo!e$er' at the same time' he


!as spea+in" !ith the company re"ardin" prospecti$e employment# The Chief of Staff inter$ie!ed !ith the company on July 1E' and didn’t su mit a letter of recusal until July 2:# /ean!hile' he recei$ed a *o offer on July 23' !hich he accepted on (u"ust 1# <hen in$esti"ators e"an to loo+ into the timeline of the employment offer' the former Chief of Staff !as forced to step do!n from the company and pay a @9'000 fine to settle the matter#

Former Admiral Con icted for 7iolatin' *ne"year Coolin'"*ff Period
( retired (dmiral and current top official !ith a San Die"o school district pled "uilty to a misdemeanor char"e of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 205' a conflict0of0interest la!# (s a result' a U#S# /a"istrate sentenced him to ser$e one year of pro ation and fined him @19'000# Despite pre$iously holdin" a presti"ious Go$ernment post and recei$in" praise from fello! collea"ues' the officer’s error in *ud"ment cost him dearly# 2n addition to the pro ation' fine' and le"al fees' he has resi"ned from the company that hired him' and may lose his *o as chief administrati$e officer of the city school district' Ino!n as the one0year >coolin" off period'? 1E U#S#C# 205 for ids former senior officers of the =%ecuti$e ranch from representin" other persons efore their former a"ency !ithin one year of lea$in" Go$ernment# 2n his plea' the former officer admitted to si"nin" a ma*or contract proposal and co$er letter on ehalf of the company and sent to his former employer' specifically !ith the intent to influence the decision# On a side note' in$esti"ators detected the conflict of interest *ust in time for the Go$ernment to eliminate the company’s id from consideration# (Source: 2he San 0iego &nion82ribune, <uly $2, 2 4%

Salary for !o ernment @ork from Non"!o ernment Source 8#9 .(S(C( : $;M"Type 7iolations<
7isa Scam Nets CK4;;; Fine
The Chief Consular Officer at a U#S# =m assy earned herself a one0!ay trip to &ederal court after in$esti"ators disco$ered she had traded tourist $isas for pricey *aunts to )aris and Jas ,e"as# 2n$esti"ators learned that after ecomin" ac.uainted !ith a "roup of usiness!omen' the officer had accepted se$eral all0e%penses paid trips# T!o 1:1

of these trips !ere to Jas ,e"as' !here the officer and family mem ers stayed in e%pensi$e suites at the /G/ Grand and Caesar’s )alace# (irfare alone for the t!o trips !as $alued at @9'000# The officer also accepted an all0e%penses paid trip to )aris to attend a charita le e$ent' includin" first0class airfare $alued at @2':00# Su se.uently' t!o of the usiness!omen su mitted tourist $isas to the officer on ehalf of $arious forei"n indi$iduals# The officer appro$ed 23 $isas' all for indi$iduals !ho !ere ineli"i le under standard =m assy policy# The officer pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 2084a6' supplementation of salary# She !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and a @3'000 fine# Ko terrorist lin+s !ere associated !ith the indi$iduals !ho o tained tourist $isas in this manner#

Char'in' Customers for Federally Funded @ork F Criminal6
The FactsE (n (ctin" (ssistant Director for the San &rancisco 2mmi"ration and Katurali;ation Ser$ice 42KS6 office char"ed one alien @890 for a file re$ie! 4for !hich the 2KS does not char"e6' as+ed another alien for @300 for an unneeded 2KS pardon' and char"ed a third @290 to "et a citi;en application !ai$er that had already een appro$ed# The Director !as sentenced to ser$e si% months in a half!ay house' to e follo!ed y si% months of home detention and four years of pro ation' durin" !hich time he !ould e prohi ited from actin" in any capacity on immi"ration matters !ithout permission of his pro ation officer# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' &e # 2003#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 208 420036 ma+es it criminal for an employee of the &ederal e%ecuti$e ranch or of an independent a"ency of the United States from recei$in" any compensation for official ser$ices# &or $iolations of this la!' 1E U#S#C# M 217 420036 authori;es fines and prison terms for up to one yearCunless the conduct is !illful' in !hich case imprisonment could e for as much as 9 years#

Na y Employee Commits Section $;M 7iolation
( U#S# District Court recently sentenced a GS01: Ka$y employee to one year of pro ation and fined him @9000 for recei$in" an ille"al contri ution to his salary in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208# 2n addition to criminal penalties' the employee !as suspended !ithout pay for t!enty days# The employee !as the director of a unit that mar+eted contracts to other acti$ities and then issued deli$ery orders to the contractors# <hile 1:2

performin" these duties' the employee as+ed a contractor for' and su se.uently recei$ed' a Coach leather !ritin" portfolio and riefcase and a laptop computer# The in$esti"ation started !hen a contractor employee' !ho sa! the fa% that the employee had sent to the contractor re.uestin" the items' notified the Ka$al Criminal 2n$esti"ati$e Ser$ice# =mployees may not solicit or accept compensation' includin" "oods or ser$ices' from any non0Go$ernment source for performin" their Go$ernment duties# =$en thou"h the "oods or ser$ices may not ha$e affected ho! the employees perform their !or+ or ma+e decisions' such as !hether to a!ard a contract' it is a $iolation to solicit or accept such compensation#

Senior *fficial Pays C$A4M;; Settlement to Department of 5ustice
To settle char"es that he $iolated 1E U#S#C# 208 y acceptin" fees for speeches made as part of his official duties' a senior official of the Kational Science &oundation a"reed to pay @2:'800 to the Department of Justice in return for droppin" criminal char"es# The senior official had deli$ered four speeches to uni$ersities as part of his official duties' yet accepted honoraria amountin" to @9'900 for those speeches# Since those speeches !ere part of the official’s duties' acceptance of compensation constituted supplementation of his salary from non0&ederal sources' !hich is prohi ited y 1E U#S#C# 208# &ederal employees may accept honoraria for acti$ities conducted in their personal capacities' ut not as part of their official duties# &urthermore' althou"h honoraria are permitted !hen spea+in" in the employeeDs personal capacity' employees may not accept compensation for spea+in"' teachin"' or !ritin" on matters that are directly related to their official duties#

District of Columbia Employee Pleads !uilty to Section $;M 7iolation
Se$eral inspectors employed y the District of Colum ia Department of Consumer and Ae"ulatory (ffairs !ere acceptin" ri es and "ratuities in e%chan"e for the issuance of construction' plum in"' and electrical permits# 2n one instance' a pri$ate architect paid FtipsF to one of these inspectors in e%chan"e for speedy and fa$ora le inspections on his reno$ation pro*ects# The architect !as allo!ed to plead "uilty to a misdemeanor count of section 208' and !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and a @1'000 fine# The inspectors !ere con$icted on char"es of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 201 4 ri ery6# 1:3

1E U#S#C# 208 ars the unla!ful supplementation of salary and applies to officers and employees of the District of Colum ia and non0Go$ernment sources !ho compensate any such officers and employees for their Go$ernment ser$ices#

District of Columbia D&7 Employee Pleads !uilty to Section $;M Char'e
(n employee of the District of Colum ia Department of /otor ,ehicles 4D/,6 !as cau"ht acceptin" ri es in e%chan"e for alterin" D/, computer records in order to Fclean upF the dri$in" records of indi$iduals !ho had outstandin" traffic tic+ets or past $iolations that mi"ht pre$ent them from o tainin" a dri$erDs license# These ri e transactions !ere arran"ed throu"h a middleman# The D/, employee and the middleman !ere con$icted of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 208H the D/, employee !as sentenced to t!o years pro ation and a @200 fine' and the middleman !as sentenced to one0year pro ation and a @290 fine# T!o citi;ens !ho paid the parties to "et their records >cleaned up? !ere con$icted of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 201 4 ri ery6# 1E U#S#C# 208 ars the unla!ful supplementation of salary and applies to &ederal officers and employees as !ell as those of the District of Colum ia and non0Go$ernment sources !ho compensate any such officers and employees for their Go$ernment ser$ices#

Pri ate Citi=en Attempts to Bribe Internal %e enue Ser ice 8I%S< Employee
The citi;en tried to ri e the 2AS employee y payin" him @290 for fa$ora le treatment re"ardin" an 2AS matter# The citi;en pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' !hich prohi its the payment of supplementation to a Go$ernment employeeDs salary#

Ci ilian Employee at -an'ley Air Force Base in 7ir'inia 7iolates #9 .(S(C( $;M
(n (ir &orce employee !as desi"nated y his ("ency as the super$isory construction representati$e for the Simplified (c.uisition of -ase =n"ineerin" Ae.uirements 4S(-=A6 contract# Under this contract' a pri$ate company a"reed to pro$ide ase en"ineerin" and construction ser$ices at Jan"ley (ir &orce -ase# The prime


contractor su contracted its electrical !or+ to another company# ( super$isor !ith the su contractor su se.uently pro$ided the (ir &orce employee !ith an air conditionin" system' a Jet S+i and trailer' a home computer system' and a laptop computer' !ith a total $alue of appro%imately @17'900# The (ir &orce employee pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' for recei$in" a supplementation to his salary as compensation for his ser$ices as a Go$ernment employee# Be !as sentenced to three years pro ation and a @2900 fine#

Central Intelli'ence A'ency 8CIA< Employee Dri es * erseas Auto Scheme
(s a U#S# &ederal employee residin" in ="ypt' the employee disco$ered that he could purchase an imported $ehicle in ="ypt !ithout ha$in" to pay the normal 190U e%cise ta%# This fact had created a lac+ mar+et in !hich ="yptian car ro+ers !ould pay U#S# employees to re"ister lu%ury cars in their names in order to allo! the dealers to e$ade import ta%es# 2n$esti"ators found that !hile in Cairo' ="ypt' the employee had a"reed to accept @29'000 in e%chan"e for chan"in" the status of his personally0o!ned $ehicle !ith the ="yptian /inistry of &orei"n (ffairs' !hich !ould allo! him to participate in the scheme# The C2( employee !as con$icted of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 208 and !as sentenced to si% monthsD super$ised release' si% monthsD home detention' and 200 hours of community ser$ice# 4Source: >7E $11= ;onflict of 'nterest Prosecution Sur5ey%

Family Business 7enture Ends in 7iolation of #9 .(S(C( $;M
( contractin" officer at the Ka$al Surface <arfare Center started a computer e.uipment usiness !ith his father0in0la! to pro$ide e%tra income# The duo concocted a scheme !here y the contractin" officer steered Go$ernment contracts for the purchase of computer e.uipment to the father0in0la!' !ho !ould uy the e.uipment from a third party $endor throu"h a computer supply ma"a;ine# The t!o !ould then o$erchar"e the Go$ernment and split the profit# This netted a payment of @28'000 for @11'000 !orth of computer e.uipment# -oth parties split the @1E'000 o$erchar"e#


The father0in0la! pled "uilty to a misdemeanor $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' !hich prohi its the supplementation of a Go$ernment employeeDs salary' and the contractin" officer pled "uilty to !ire fraud and mail fraud# 2n their pre0indictment plea a"reements' the father0in0la! a"reed to pay @1E'000 restitution' and the contractin" officer a"reed to pay an amount of restitution to e determined at the sentencin" hearin"#

Cab Company *,ner and District of Columbia *fficial Conspire to 7iolate #9 .(S(C( $;M
Suspicious in$esti"ators disco$ered that for three years' a ca company o!ner had conspired !ith the Chief of the D#C# Office of Ta%ica s to pro$ide ille"al ta%ica dri$er’s licenses to un.ualified dri$ers# The dri$ers paid money to the company o!ner' !ho too+ the money and the dri$ersD names to the D#C# officialH the D#C# official then prepared the ille"al licenses# The company o!ner also paid the D#C# official money for other ille"al fa$ors' such as re"isterin" $ehicles that should not ha$e een re"istered# The D#C# official pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 208' !hich prohi its the supplementation of a Go$ernment employee’s salary' and a"reed to testify a"ainst the ca company o!ner# The D#C# official !as also con$icted of nine felony counts' includin" acceptin" ri es and "ratuities in $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 201#

Air Force Contractin' *fficer Pays CB;;; for #9 .(S(C( $;M 7iolation
2n return for fa$ora le treatment in contractin"' employees of a pri$ate company a"reed to pro$ide an (ir &orce contractin" officer !ith money in the form of condominium rental payments# That money !as paid throu"h different intermediaries in order to dis"uise the purpose and the source of the funds# 2n addition' an in$esti"ation disclosed that the company purchased certain $alua le "oods and items for the condominium# &inally' the in$esti"ation disclosed that the company purchased smaller $alue items' such as dinners and as+et all tic+ets' for the (ir &orce contractin" officer# Due to statute of limitations pro lems' the in$esti"ation focused on the payment of the smaller $alue items# The contractin" officer pled "uilty to a sin"le misdemeanor count of 1E U#S#C# 208' unla!fully au"mentin" his salary !hile employed y the (ir &orce# Be !as ordered


to pay a fine of @7'000' !hich the Court calculated to e three times the $alue of those accepted items#

Payoff for Special Access at !o ernment Auction Ends in C#;;; Fine
2n an attempt to "ain preferential treatment at a Go$ernment auction' t!o rothers paid off an auction "uard# 2nstead' they !ound up purchasin" misdemeanor $iolations of 1E U#S#C# 208 4supplementation of a Go$ernment employeeDs salary6# Sentences of pro ation and a @1'000 fine !ere imposed on each#

Assistant .nited States Attorney 8A.SA< in Tucson Ille'ally Possesses Sheep Skull and )orns
The (ssistant U#S# (ttorney 4(US(6 prosecuted an indi$idual for ille"ally +illin" a i"horn sheep on an 2ndian Aeser$ation# (s a result of the prosecution' the hunter forfeited the i"horn sheep and trophy 4s+ull and horns6' $alued at appro%imately @9'000' to the (ri;ona Game and &ish Department# )ursuant to a re.uest from the (US(' the (ri;ona Game and &ish Department entered into an a"reement !ith the (US( allo!in" him to pu licly display the s+ull and horns in his office' ut re.uirin" their return upon re.uest# Bo!e$er' after lea$in" employment !ith the U#S# (ttorney’s office' the (US( too+ the s+ull and horns !ith him and treated them as his personal property# <hen the former (US( !as .uestioned a year later a out his possession of the s+ull and horns' he claimed that an unspecified 2ndian had sent the s+ull and horns to him in appreciation for his !or+ on the prosecution of the hunter# 2n$esti"ation sho!ed that such a "ift !ould ha$e een contrary to tri al practices and no mem er of the tri e could e found !ho +ne! anythin" a out the alle"ed "ift# The Go$ernment then re"ained possession of the s+ull and horns from the former (US( and returned them to the tri e# The (US( a"reed to plead "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 208 for his possession of the trophy#

Secretary at Federal Prison Pleads !uilty to #9 .(S(C( $;M 7iolation
2n$esti"ators disco$ered that the secretary at a &ederal prison had accepted money from an inmate in e%chan"e for allo!in" him certain pri$ile"es' includin" allo!in" him to place unauthori;ed calls on her office phone# The defendant pled "uilty to the char"e


of recei$in" compensation from a non0Go$ernment source for doin" her Go$ernment *o 41E U#S#C# 2084a66 and !as sentenced to t!o years pro ation#

Postal Ser ice Employee Con icted of #9 .(S(C( $;M 7iolation
2n$esti"ators disco$ered that an assistance counselor !ith the )ostal Ser$ice !as ta+in" +ic+ ac+s from a near y hospital# The counselor pro$ided assessment' referral' and follo!0up counselin" ser$ices to )ostal Ser$ice employees and their families relatin" to chemical dependency or eha$ioral pro lems# <hile performin" these duties' the counselor recei$ed cash' a telephone credit card' limousine ser$ices' food' hotel accommodations' and tra$el reim ursement for himself' his !ife and his rother from a Tope+a' Iansas hospital# These enefits had an a""re"ate $alue of in e%cess of @:9'000# The hospital !as a psychiatric care and dru"0alcohol dependency treatment facility# The counselor !as char"ed !ith fifteen counts of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 208' for acceptin" dual compensation' and pled "uilty#

!SA Employee Con icted of 7iolatin' #9 .(S(C( $;M
(s the Comptroller of the General Ser$ices (dministration 4GS(6' the employee in .uestion !as responsi le for implementin" and o$erseein" GS(Ds contract !ith Diners Clu for Go$ernment char"e cards# Durin" the life of the contract' the employee accepted numerous e%pensi$e meals from Diners Clu employees in <ashin"ton' D#C#' as !ell as accommodations' meals' and entertainment in Jas ,e"as and )hoeni%# The employee pled "uilty to one count of conspiracy 41E U#S#C# 3516 and one count of recei$in" dual compensation 41E U#S#C# 2086' oth misdemeanors# Be !as sentenced to one year of super$ised pro ation and a @290 fine#

Citi=en Pleads !uilty to 7iolatin' #9 .(S(C( $;M
( pri$ate electrical contractor !as char"ed !ith supplementin" the salary of a )u lic (ffairs Officer !ho !as a representati$e for small and disad$anta"ed usinesses for the (rmy Corps of =n"ineers# The contractor !as in$ol$ed in the payment of money to the officer in return for the officer’s assistance in facilitatin" the sale and de$elopment of land for off0post housin" around &ort Drum' Ke! Por+# The contractor pled "uilty to $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# 208' supplementin" the salary of a &ederal employee' and !as sentenced to one year of pro ation# 1:E

Public @orks Employee /!ets the Boot2 for Acceptin' Payments
(n employee of the ,ehicle 2mmo ili;ation -ranch at the D#C# Department of )u lic <or+s !ho decided to supplement his salary !ith pri$ate funds .uic+ly found himself !ith no salary at all# The employee solicited and accepted @:00 in cash for remo$in" a la!fully0attached oot on a D#C# $ehicle# 2n return' the employee recei$ed three years pro ation' si% months home detention' 100 hours community ser$ice' and @300 in fines for his $iolation of 1E U#S#C# 208' ille"al supplementation of salary#

Easy Come4 Easy !o
2n$esti"ators disco$ered that an 2mmi"ration and Katurali;ation Ser$ice (d*udication Officer had ta+en ri es from an immi"ration consultant to facilitate the consultant’s cases# The officer pled "uilty to three misdemeanor counts of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# M 2084a6' recei$in" compensation from a pri$ate party for ser$ices rendered to the United States#

Acceptin' Bribes for Priority Ser ice Earns C#;4;;; Fine
( ,eterans (ffairs ratin" assistant technician responsi le for preppin" claims files for ad*udication !as found to ha$e ta+en ri es from filers to "reen0li"ht false and inflated disa ility claims for re$ie!# Be pled "uilty to one felony count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# M 208 4a6' unla!fully acceptin" supplementation of "o$ernment salary' and !as slapped !ith four years pro ation' @10'000 in fines' and 120 hours of community ser$ice#

!ifts from 7endor %esult in T,o 0ears Probation
(n employee of the Department of the 2nterior’s Office of the Geolo"ical Sur$ey too+ ad$anta"e of her "o$ernment char"e card responsi ilities and started acceptin" "ift cards from a certain $endor in return for steerin" her purchases his !ay# Ber @900 in "ift cards cost her t!o years of pro ation and 100 hours of community ser$ice !hen she pled "uilty to one count of $iolatin" 1E U#S#C# M 208' unla!fully acceptin" supplementation of her "o$ernment salary#


Time and Attendance 7iolations
A Fe, .neDcused Absences
(n employee of a military ser$ice !as not particularly careful a out his time reportin"# The employee arri$ed late' left early' and left the uildin" for e%tended periods of undocumented time# Of 2E8 !or+days re$ie!ed durin" an in$esti"ation' the employee !as found to ha$e !or+ed less than the re.uired E#9 hours on 139 occasions 4:5U of the time6H all told' the employee misstated his !or+ hours y o$er 100 hours# &or his unscrupulous time+eepin"' the employee recei$ed a letter of reprimand and !as char"ed lea$e to accurately reflect his attendance# 2n a similar case' an employee of a DoD facility !as issued a letter of !arnin" and instruction after she arri$ed late on se$eral days ut left at the scheduled shift completion time !ithout claimin" lea$e or reportin" her tardiness to mana"ement# The letter instructed the employee to si"n0in and si"n0out# Kot!ithstandin" the letter' it !as later determined that the employee continued to fail to fulfill her time commitments' lea$in" o$er an hour early on multiple occasions# The employee !as issued a letter of reprimand for lea$in" the !or+site !ithout permission#

D7D Bootle''ers &IA Durin' !o ernment @ork )ours
( &ederal employee used his Go$ernment computer to ma+e ille"al copies of commercial D,Ds in $iolation of copyri"ht la!s# Be and another employee also used their Go$ernment computers and duty time to !atch the mo$ies# The other employee too+ lunches lastin" up to three hours in order to !atch the D,Ds and ta+e naps# 2nitially the employees’ super$isors si"ned off on this eha$ior' e$en assi"nin" e%tra !or+ to others to ma+e up for the employees’ time !asted nappin" and mo$ie !atchin"# The employee !ho copied the D,Ds recei$ed a !ritten reprimand# The super$isor recei$ed an oral admonishment for failin" to address the misconduct' and another employee recei$ed a Jetter of Counselin" for +no!in"ly acceptin" a pirated D,D# 2n a similar case' a ci$ilian employee !or+in" for the U#S# (rmy in Germany !as in$ol$ed in sellin" pirated D,Ds# Be used the profits from his ille"al operation to uy $acation homes and


lu%ury cars and to pay for fre.uent =uropean s+i $acations# Be de$oted some of his duty time to the mar+etin" and sellin" of the ootle" $ideos' includin" ta+in" payments !hile on the *o # =$en thou"h the employee had left &ederal ser$ice y the time the accusations a"ainst him !ere su stantiated' administrati$e action !as ta+en to ar him from US (rmy =urope installations#

*ut"of"*ffice %eplyE *ut SickE Can be %eached at Bo,lin' Alley
( GS01: Director' !ithin an (rmy Command' failed to sho! up to !or+ for at least three months# Be complained of needin" a dou le hip replacement ut ne$er su mitted sic+ lea$e# Thou"h he claimed to !or+ from home' he !as ne$er appro$ed for a !or+0at0home pro"ram# )eople reported seein" him around the community and he !as spotted at the )L' the Commissary' and e$en the o!lin" alleyN The man recei$ed a $er al reprimand and !as counseled on appropriate lea$e re.uest and appro$al procedures#

Falsification of Time Cards %esults in %emo al
(n employee at the <alter Aeed (rmy /edical Center had a ha it of sho!in" up for !or+ only one !ee+ a month# Bo!e$er' her super$isor soon noticed that the employee’s paychec+ did not reflect this erratic schedule# Upon .uestionin"' the employee admitted to chan"in" the pay codes on her time card after they !ere si"ned y her super$isor# The employee !as allo!ed to resi"n' and is inde ted to the Go$ernment for @10'3E3#:5# The money !ill e deducted from her retirement pay#

Pre"si'nin' Employee+s Time Card %esults in Counselin'
(n (ir &orce Ser"eant at the &ield /aintenance center pre0si"ned one of her su ordinate’s time cards efore she left for a t!o0!ee+ lea$e# Unfortunately for her' the su ordinate su se.uently chan"ed se$eral of the o%es she had ori"inally mar+ed as >lea$e? to >re"ular fle% time'? and then too+ lea$e !hile still dra!in" re"ular pay# <hen in$esti"ators disco$ered the discrepancy' the su ordinate resi"ned# The trustin" Ser"eant earned counselin" for failin" to comply !ith DoD &inancial /ana"ement Ae"ulations'


!hich stipulate that super$isors must correctly certify time cards at the end of the pay period in order to pre$ent employee fraud#

-yin' About * ertime Doesn+t Pay6
The FactsE ( former employee of the Department of Defense entered o$ertime hours he hadn’t !or+ed into a computer time0+eepin" system# Be !as cau"ht# Be pleaded "uilty and !as ordered to pay the Go$ernment @5'900 and !as sentenced to three years pro ation C not the sort of o$ertime he !as loo+in" for# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' (pr# 2003#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2E5 420036 states that anyone presentin" to any >person or officer in the ci$il' military' or na$al ser$ice of the United States' or to any department or a"ency thereof? a claim for money from the &ederal Go$ernment' +no!in" such claim to e false' shall e fined and imprisoned for no more than 9 years#

)un' By @ire Fraud
The FactsE ( Defense 2ntelli"ence ("ency secretary in (rlin"ton' ,ir"inia' improperly o tained access to her time and attendance records on 5: occasions# She used her access to credit herself !ith o$er :'000 hours of o$ertime she hadn’t !or+ed# She !as cau"ht and pleaded "uilty to !ire fraud' for !hich she !as sentenced to t!el$e months and one day in prison' to e follo!ed y three years of pro ation !ith participation in Gam lers (nonymous# She also had to pay the Go$ernment @81'3E0 in restitution# Bopefully' she learned from this ad et# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' (pr# 2003#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 13:3 420036 mandates penalties for transmittin" > y means of !ire' radio' or tele$ision communication in interstate or forei"n commerce' any !ritin"s' si"ns' si"nals' pictures' or sounds? in order to e%ecute a plan to defraud# The penaltiesG &ines' imprisonment of not more than 20 years' or oth C unless the fraud affects a financial institution' in !hich case the fine is to e of not more than @1 million and the imprisonment of not more than 30 years#

Falsifyin' * ertime Can Be a Costly Business


The FactsE ( &ederal employee at the )enta"on decided to participate in a scheme that in$ol$ed lo""in" false o$ertime hours in an electronic time+eepin" system# The employee pled "uilty at trial and !as sentenced to three years of pro ation alon" !ith si% months of home confinement' and ordered to pay o$er @17'000 restitution# 4SourceG Federal Ethics Report' /arch 2003#6 The -a,E 1E U#S#C# M 2E5 420036 mandates fines and imprisonment for up to 9 years for anyone !ho presents a claim for money' !hich the person +no!s to e fraudulent' to the >ci$il' military' or na$al ser$ice of the United States#?

Improper Time Sheets
(lle"ations !ere made that a Department of Defense 4DoD6 employee !as not !or+in" his assi"ned hours and !as fraudulently claimin" o$ertime hours he did not !or+# (fter an in$esti"ation' it !as determined that the employee !as attendin" colle"e courses at lunch for appro%imately t!o hours and !or+ed late to ma+e up the time# Bis time and attendance sheets sho!ed him !or+in" his normal hours !ith no indication of the lon" lunch and late hours to accommodate his colle"e courses# The sheets !ere su mitted !ithout sho!in" the modified schedule ecause a cler+ incorrectly told the employee’s super$isor that >the system !ouldn’t allo! $ariations from a normal !or+day#? The employee' the super$isor' and the cler+ !ere all instructed on proper time+eepin" procedures#

INS !rants Administrati e -ea e as A,ard for Contributions to CFC
Officials in an 2mmi"ration and Katurali;ation Ser$ice 42KS6 district office re!arded employees !ho contri uted at least @900 to the Com ined &ederal Campai"n 4C&C6 !ith ei"ht hours of administrati$e lea$e# (fter an in$esti"ation' it !as found that the employees !ho !ere "ranted and used the lea$e did not ha$e the lea$e properly documented on their time sheets# (s the district director did not carry out the $iolations in a +no!in" and !illful !ay and ecause the employees affected stated they did not feel coerced' no char"es !ere filed# The director did recei$e a letter of counselin" re"ardin" her mana"ement of the C&C pro"ram' ho!e$er#


7A Physician Time and Attendance Issue
(n administrati$e in$esti"ation su stantiated that a part0time Department of ,eterans (ffairs 4,(6 physician routinely !or+ed at a non0,( clinic durin" his ,( core hours and as a result failed to meet his ,( tour of duty o li"ation# The in$esti"ation also re$ealed that the physician’s super$isor failed to chec+ on him to ensure that he !as !or+in" the hours re.uired# 2n response to the in$esti"ator’s recommendation' administrati$e action !as ta+en a"ainst oth the physician and the super$isor# The physician !as char"ed lea$e for the hours not !or+ed and !as instructed to re$ise his hours at the non0,( clinic#

Employees Terminated for Abusin' %eli'ious -ea e
&or a period of se$eral years' t!o top e%ecuti$es at the Ka$al Undersea <arfare Center had an astonishin" !or+ recordCthey too+ nearly no $acation time at all# The reason' in$esti"ators soon disco$ered' !as that the e%ecuti$es had een ta+in" >reli"ious compensatory time? instead# Curiously' the e%ecuti$es’ a sences seldom fell on any traditionally0o ser$ed reli"ious holidays# 2nstead' in$esti"ators found that the pair’s so0 called reli"ious o ser$ances too+ place on days !hen they had medical appointments' si"htseein" trips' and "olf tournaments# (s+ed !hether "olf tournaments could e considered reli"ious o ser$ances' one e%ecuti$e replied' >They could e for some people#? Unamused' the 2nspector General found that the t!o had made a >premeditated' conspiratorial effort to defraud the Go$ernment'? and forced them into retirement# Aeli"ious compensatory time is a$aila le for "o$ernment employees !ho need to o ser$e reli"ious re.uirements 1 ut e$en then' it needs to e made up at a later time# (Source: +++67o5E@ec6com, <uly $, 2 ?%

.se of Sick -ea e for &ilitary Tours Earns Employee Dismissal
( reser$ist’s use of sic+ lea$e to account for a sences on acti$e0duty military tours resulted in the end of a 200year federal career# O$er a period of se$eral years' the reser$ist accounted for a sences from his ci$ilian position at C=KTCO/ as >sic+ lea$e'? !hen in fact he !as on acti$e0duty military tours# This allo!ed the employee to an+ annual lea$e' as !ell as collect dual salaries from oth the ci$il ser$ice and the military# 19:

Gi$en the reser$ist’s t!o decades of federal employment' the *ud"e found the reser$ist’s pleas of i"norance as to the proper lea$e procedures uncon$incin"# The *ud"e also too+ into consideration the testimony of the reser$ist’s commandin" officer at C=KTCO/' !ho testified that his trust in the reser$ist had een !holly eroded# (s a conse.uence of the reser$ist’s a use of the lea$e system' his career in the ci$il ser$ice !as terminated# (Source: 2 - (SRP 9E:'S ! ?$%

Employee Disciplined for Double Countin' Ci ilian and &ilitary %eser e Duties
( senior a"ency attorney did a little >dou le duty'? and as a >re!ard'? he !as ordered to reim urse the a"ency for 900#9 hours of annual lea$e and 1E hours of sic+ lea$e# The a"ency report found the la!yer spent the e.ui$alent of a out E3 days performin" his /ilitary Aeser$e duties# <hile his dual ser$ice is admira le' y not char"in" military or annual lea$e for some a sences' the officer’s ci$ilian lea$e alance e%ceeded that to !hich he !as entitled# Section 2739#509 of Title 9 of the Code of &ederal Ae"ulations states an employee shall use official time in an honest effort to perform official duties# <hile his ci$ilian lea$e alance !as not reduced !hile the attorney !as performin" his official military duties' he recei$ed credit as if he !as performin" his ci$ilian duties at the same time# &urther' the a"ency found the attorney had misused his su ordinates’ time' usin" them to schedule personal acti$ities such as haircuts' tra$el' and "olf# (lthou"h the final determination found no dishonesty' lac+ of inte"rity' or moti$e for personal "ain on the attorney’s part' neither the a"ency nor the /ilitary Aeser$e found the attorney’s actions accepta le# The attorney !as admonished for failure to e%ercise reasona le care in monitorin" his lea$e alances' and also counseled for misusin" su ordinates to perform personal tas+s# 2n addition' the /ilitary Aeser$e -ranch counseled him >se$erely? for his ne"li"ence in monitorin" his lea$e account and for improper staff use# <or+in" for t!o military ranches is le"al' ut it re.uires careful accountin" for your time' includin" lea$e# (Source: (ilitary Ser5ice 'nspector 7eneral%


Director Abused -ea e and Personnel4 !et+s Demoted and -oses 5ob
The Director of a military staff office cau"ht the eye of the 2nspector General y a usin" time' attendance' and official tra$el re"ulations' and y displayin" a usi$e personal eha$ior to!ards her staff# The Director failed to use proper lea$e or to document authori;ed a sences in$ol$in" se$eral trips# She also discoura"ed attempts y her su ordinates to $erify her !herea outs' often usin" profane lan"ua"e and threatenin" $er al out ursts# 2n addition' the 2nspector General disco$ered the Director had co$ered the documents that detailed her use of lea$e !ith cross outs' chan"es and other in+ annotations' ma+in" them $irtually incomprehensi le# (s a result' the ser$ice secretary too+ action that resulted in her ein" remo$ed from the Senior =%ecuti$e Ser$ices and demoted in "rade to GS019# (s part of a ne"otiated settlement' the Director a"reed to retire from &ederal ser$ice as soon as she !as eli"i le# (Source: (ilitary Ser5ice 'nspector 7eneral%

Tra el 7iolations
Bermuda4 5amaica4 *h I @ant to Take 0ou
( certain military "eneral had a fancy for la$ish $acations# Be decided to ta+e numerous personal trips includin" one to -ermuda usin" a military airplane# Once his $acation re"imen !as disco$ered' the "eneral !as re.uired to reim urse the "o$ernment for @E2'000# 2n addition' he !as demoted upon retirement#

A Pri ate 5etG Don+t &ind if I Do >
(n O08 !ith o$er 39 years of ser$ice in the U#S# military !as scheduled for a command $isit to a ase# Bis ori"inal C012 fli"ht !as delayed' so his staff spontaneously arran"ed a su stitute fli"ht for himG a C09 that had een pre$iously unscheduled to fly# Despite his many years of e%perience and his stated commitment to confrontin" tra$el a use issues !ithin his command' he and three mem ers of his staff oarded a near0


empty *et to ma+e the command $isit on time# The "o$ernment incurred @3E'000 in additional costs for the special fli"ht# The officer !as counseled y his command a out the $iolation#

Fasten 0our Seatbelts( @e+re in for a Career"Endin' %ide
( Ser$ice Colonel !as found "uilty of larceny and su mittin" false statements after he used "o$ernment funds to purchase round trip airline tic+ets from Iu!ait to the States to attend his son’s "raduation# The Colonel also su mitted a false tra$el authori;ation listin" a fictitious reason for the tra$el# The Colonel $oluntarily repaid the funds and retired early#

False Tra el EDpenses
( ser$ice mem er filed a tra$el $oucher for falsely claimed e%penses for dri$in" from ,ir"inia to California to relocate for a ne! assi"nment' and she recei$ed pay for 10 days of per diem# The in.uiry found that the ser$ice mem er recei$ed a ride to 2llinois from a friend and then fle! to California# She !as made to repay the difference in reim ursements and recei$ed a letter of reprimand#

!erman )oliday
T!o employees of a DoD ("ency o tained o$erpayment for official tra$el to Germany# The t!o employees 0 !hom !e !ill call y the pseudonyms John and Sarah 0 claimed hotel lod"in" reim ursement for a ni"ht in !hich they !ere on a plane flyin" to Germany# 2n addition' the t!o too+ a >rest day? efore the conference on !hich no mission duties !ere performed and no lea$e !as ta+en# 4They indicated that this !as in order to o$ercome *et la" efore the conference#6# Their misconduct continued after the conference# The t!o remained in Germany for a day in order to tour $arious tourist sites in Germany on the Go$ernment’s dime' tra$elin" appro%imately 900 miles in a Go$ernment rental car and re.uestin" reim ursement for the fuel costs associated !ith their personal acti$ity' as !ell as lod"in" and per diem e%penses# Sarah later outdid John y claimin" hotel costs for the ni"ht after she returned to the US and durin" !hich she !as in her o!n home# 195

John and Sarah had o$er @790 and o$er @1100 respecti$ely !ithheld from their pay# The t!o !ere also re.uired to recei$e refresher trainin" on the use of the Defense Tra$el System# John' the appro$in" official for the tra$el $ouchers for Sarah’s trip' !as also found to ha$e failed to e%ercise due dili"ence as a Certifyin" Official# 2n the ac+"round of the case !as a romantic relationship et!een John and Sarah# Thou"h the t!o denied ha$in" a romantic relationship durin" their trip' they admitted to e"innin" a relationship E months later 1 and that continued# (s a result of the on"oin" relationship' John !as re.uired to recuse himself from all actions in$ol$in" Sarah' includin" si"nin" as the appro$in" official for any actions that could e to the enefit or detriment of Sarah#

Abuse of *fficial Tra el and -ea e !arners *ne 0ear Probation
The former Deputy Under0Secretary in the Department of =ducation !ound up in &ederal court after in$esti"ators unco$ered discrepancies re"ardin" his tra$el' lea$e' and financial disclosure# 2n$esti"ators disco$ered that the official' !ho !as also employed as a tra$elin" *ud"e in the State of Te%as' had made at least fourteen trips on Go$ernment e%pense !hen the purpose of his tra$el !as at least partly to accrue time to!ard a Te%as state pension# On se$eral of these trips' the official had additionally re.uested and recei$ed &ederal sic+ lea$eH further' he had collected reim ursement from the Go$ernment for some of his personal e%penses# &inally' the official had failed to report his salary from the State of Te%as on his Go$ernment financial disclosure form# The official pled "uilty to the conflict of interest statute# Be !as sentenced to one year of pro ation' 100 hours of community ser$ice' and a @9'000 fine# Be additionally reim ursed the Go$ernment @E'798#E9 for his fraudulent claims#

&ilitary *fficer Dances @hile the Public Pays
The FactsE (ccordin" to a military ser$ice 2nspector General in.uiry' a senior military officer planned to attend t!o alls ta+in" place !ithin rou"hly an hour’s dri$e of his station# &or these' he o tained official orders and' accordin" to his tra$el claims' recei$ed payment for hotel lod"in"' meals' and incidental e%penses 4per diem6 C amountin" all told to around @900# This conduct occurred as one of a series of offenses


that resulted in the officer ein" relie$ed of command' issued a puniti$e letter of reprimand' and ordered to forfeit @1'000# The -a,E The Department of Defense 4DoD6 Tra$el Ae"ulations pro$ide $arious "uidelines for tra$el of uniformed 4in ,olume 16 and ci$ilian 4in ,olume 26 DoD employees# (pplica le to this case !as ,olume 1G >Joint &ederal Tra$el Ae"ulations? 4J&TA6# J&TA section U2010 re.uires a uniformed ser$ice mem er to use the same care in incurrin" e%penses !hen the &ederal Go$ernment is to pay >as !ould a prudent person tra$elin" at personal e%pense # # # # =%cess costs' circuitous routes' delays or lu%ury accommodations that are unnecessary or un*ustified are the mem er’s financial responsi ility#? /oreo$er' J&TA section U:102 for ids a uniformed ser$ice mem er from o tainin" per diem for any temporary duty 4TDP6 performed !ithin t!el$e hours# Since attendance at each all alon" !ith round0trip tra$el could ha$e een completed !ithin t!el$e hours had the officer e%ercised prudence' this re"ulation made it e$en clearer that the officer should not ha$e o tained his per diem# Since other a"encies ha$e tra$el re"ulations' all &ederal employees are encoura"ed to $erify the propriety of ha$in" the Go$ernment pay for their tra$el e%penses#

Bumped @ell
2t !as the youn" employeeDs first official trip to <ashin"ton' DC# 2t !as *ust a one0day' round trip# Ber meetin" !as scheduled for 1G00 )/# (n%ious to ma+e a "ood impression 4and to loo+ around DC6' she oo+ed an early0mornin" fli"ht out of (tlanta# <hen she "ot to the airport' she disco$ered that the fli"ht !as o$er oo+ed' and the airline !as offerin" free' round0trip tic+ets to anyone !ho !ould $olunteer to ta+e the ne%t fli"ht# That fli"ht !as to arri$e in DC at 12G20 )/' and she fi"ured that she !ould still ha$e time to ma+e her meetin"# (s her plane reached Aichmond' the pilot announced that !ould e a sli"ht delay !hile (ir &orce One too+ off# Ber plane circled and circled# The delay lasted for o$er an hour' and y the time the plane finally landed' she had missed the meetin"#

FBI .nderco er Parties
(ccordin" to an &-2 report' upon the retirement of a senior &-2 official' &-2 personnel from around the country *ourneyed to <ashin"ton to attend the official’s 198

retirement party# /any out0of0to!n G0men tra$eled on official orders and pu lic e%pense# (ccordin" to their tra$el orders' the purpose of the trip !as to attend an ethics conferenceN (ccordin" to the ne!s report' only fi$e people actually attended the ethics forum#

FBI False Tra el Claim
( former super$isory special a"ent of the &-2 !as sentenced in U#S# District Court for falsely claimin" tra$el e%penses to !hich he !as not entitled# The former a"ent pled "uilty to one count of theft of Go$ernment property# The former a"ent had ended a period of tra$el fi$e days earlier than his schedule 4and later tra$el claim6 stated# Be !as ordered to pay @1'EE5 in restitution#

*fficial Tra el to Conference Turns into Florida 7acation
( Department of Defense 4DoD6 official !as to tra$el to and attend a conference in &lorida !hile on DoD tra$el orders# Bis !ife accompanied him# 2t !as alle"ed that after chec+in" in at the hotel !here the conference !as to e held and then rentin" a con$erti le' the official promptly left for a short $acation !ith his !ife for all three days of the conference# (fter an in$esti"ation it !as determined that the official did not attend the conference' told a su ordinate to >co$er for him'? and filed a fraudulent tra$el claim !ith DoD for the three days of the conference he did not attend# ( proposal !as made to ha$e the official separated from &ederal ser$ice#

False Tra el Claim Filed I
(lle"ations !ere made a"ainst a Ka$y enlisted man re"ardin" filin" a false tra$el claim# (fter an in$esti"ation it !as determined the indi$idual had claimed his t!o children accompanied him durin" his )CS mo$e across the country !hen in fact the children !ere in the custody of his e%0!ife# Be !as reduced in ran+ one "rade and ordered to forfeit @21:0#00 in pay#


False Tra el Claim Filed II
2t !as determined after an in$esti"ation that a Department of Defense 4DoD6 official filed a false claim for tra$el e%penses# The official claimed he !as stayin" at a hotel' and as a result' !as paid the appropriate per diem rate y the Ka$y# 2t !as determined durin" the course of the in$esti"ation that the official had actually een on oard a Ka$y ship 4a situation !here a much reduced per diem is paid6 durin" the time he claimed he !as stayin" at the hotel# The official reim ursed the Ka$y' !as issued a letter of caution' and !as counseled y his super$isor#

False Tra el Claim Filed III
( former Department of Defense 4DoD6 employee !as sentenced in U#S# District Court for ma+in" false relocation claims to the Go$ernment# The former employee made o$er @19'000 in false relocation claims in connection !ith a permanent chan"e of station 4)CS6 mo$e# The *ud"e sentenced the former employee to t!o years pro ation and ordered her to pay more than @19'000 in restitution#

False Tra el Claim Filed I7
(n (rmy employee !as sentenced in U#S# District Court for falsifyin" lod"in" e%penses# She pled "uilty to one count of theft of Go$ernment property# The employee had tra$eled to a near y facility and incurred no lod"in" e%penses# Bo!e$er' she had filed a claim for @109 !hen she returned ac+ to her duty station# The employee !as sentenced to one year of pro ation and !as ordered to pay a @3'000 fine# 2ronically' the employee !as the director of the Bonesty' =thics' (ccounta ility' Aespect' Trust' and Support 4B=(ATS6 )ro"ram for her duty station at the time she committed the $iolation#

Senior *fficer4 @ho Abused Tra el and &isused Staff4 Disciplined
( senior military officer and his !ife accrued improper airfare e%penses y flyin" in premium class on official usiness trips# On one trip' for e%ample' the officer *ustified usiness0class seats y indicatin" he !as re.uired to perform official usiness immediately after his arri$al at his tra$el destination' !hen in fact he spent almost his first full day attendin" a ,2) !elcome' ma+in" U#S# em assy calls' en*oyin" lunch and


dinner' and tourin" a local $ineyard# The officer e%plained that he chose to fly usiness0 class on another trip ecause flyin" coach !ould ha$e loo+ed >stran"e? to his hosts# On other trips' the officer made unofficial' unscheduled stops for family reasons' such as attendin" his children’s sportin" e$ents' !ithout ta+in" lea$e# &ederal tra$el re"ulations limit official tra$el to coach0class unless special circumstances' such as special security re.uirements' medical re.uirements' or una$aila ility of coach0class seats' e%ist# The ran+ of the tra$eler does not *ustify premium class tra$el# The officer also $iolated 9 C#&#A# 2739#5094 6' !hich mandates a Go$ernment employee >shall not encoura"e' direct' coerce' or re.uest a su ordinate to use official time to perform acti$ities other than those re.uired in the performance of official duties or authori;ed in accordance !ith la! or re"ulation#? (lthou"h ne$er issuin" any direct orders' the officer re.uested his su ordinates to perform many personal ser$ices such as carin" for his do"' shoppin" for athletic "ear' and repairin" his icycle# Su ordinates reported they had "i$en tours around the local area to the officer’s friends and relati$es and rescued the officer’s !ife on the roadside one Sunday# The officer’s other $iolations included as+in" his su ordinates to ma+e thousands of dollars in payments out of their personal funds for $arious purchases for him# =$en thou"h he reim ursed them later' it is improper to solicit loans from su ordinates# The officer recei$ed a )uniti$e Jetter of Aeprimand at non0*udicial punishment proceedin"s# Be $oluntarily reim ursed the Go$ernment @1:':71#03 for tra$el enefits he and his !ife recei$ed and char"ed 19 days to lea$e to account for days of T(D tra$el that !ere for personal usiness# &urther audit of his tra$el claims resulted in collectin" another @1'315# 2n addition' he !as reduced in "rade upon retirement from acti$e duty# (Source: (ilitary Ser5ice 'nspector 7eneral%

False Tra el Claim Filed 7
( former Department of Defense 4DoD6 employee !as sentenced in U#S# District Court for su mittin" false tra$el claims in relation to a permanent chan"e of station 4)CS6 mo$e# The former employee !as char"ed !ith claimin" o$er @22'000 in false tra$el e%penses# She !as also char"ed !ith alterin" documents to su stantiate the


e%penses# The *ud"e sentenced her to fi$e years pro ation and ordered her to pay @10':97 in restitution#

!o ernment Employee -iable for Accident Incurred on Personal Business
( K(S( employee on official usiness arran"ed to ha$e his return date e%tended so that he could remain in the area for personal reasons# Durin" his e%tended stay' he retained his Go$ernment0leased rental $ehicle# <hile on his !ay to the airport to return home' the employee !as in$ol$ed in a car accident !hen an el+ ran into his $ehicle# The employee reim ursed the rental car company for more than @2900 in repair costs' and then su mitted a reim ursement re.uest to K(S(# K(S( refused payment as the employee !as not on official usiness at the time of the accident# The &ederal Tra$el Ae"ulation mandates that an a"ency may pay only those e%penses essential to the transaction of official usiness# Specifically' employees may e reim ursed for deducti les paid to rental car companies only if the dama"e occurs !hile the employee is performin" official usiness# (fter the K(S( employee’s temporary duty ended' the rental car ecame oth his e%pense and his responsi ility#


Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful